From list-managers-owner Fri Aug 2 02:03:57 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id BAA11753 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 2 Aug 1996 01:53:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from postie.das.gov.au (postie.das.gov.au [147.211.53.231]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id BAA11717 for ; Fri, 2 Aug 1996 01:53:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from garry.pur.das.gov.au (garry.pur.das.gov.au [147.211.63.110]) by postie.das.gov.au (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id SAA24553 for ; Fri, 2 Aug 1996 18:22:19 +1000 (EST) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 18:22:19 +1000 (EST) Message-Id: <2.2.16.19960802181819.2d0f8b4c@zeus.das.gov.au> X-Sender: strden@zeus.das.gov.au X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Denis Strangman Subject: Studies of lists Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hello list-managers I have recently undertaken a 35-question survey of the membership of a list I moderate (PUBSEC) which deals with public sector reform, management, and commercialisation. There was a fairly representative response from about 115 participants which is a good slice seeing as though there are only 370 on the List. Questions were asked about their attitude to the postings, age group, professional status, how they read their mail, how often, other lists they belonged to, its relation to their work etc. I am about to collate the returns and draw some conclusions and I am wondering if members know of similar studies/surveys which have been published. I am familiar with the Thomsen study of the PRForum list and the Ogan study of the TEL List. This research will be an extension of an earlier study entitled which I have parked at a ftp site The rtf version is I would welcome any leads for benchmarking purposes or contact with other list managers/moderators/researchers who have undertaken or plan similar studies. Cheers (Now I am going back to watch the Olympics) Denis Strangman Department of Administrative Services, GPO Box 1920 Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia. E-mail: denis.strangman@das.gov.au Phone: +61 6 2758808 fax +61 6 2753464 PUBSEC URL: http://www.das.gov.au/~world/listserv/pub_sec.html Have you checked out GELPROC? (Government ElectronicProcurement) URL: http://www.gems.gov.au/listserv/gelproc.htm From list-managers-owner Fri Aug 2 22:52:38 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id WAA20387 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 2 Aug 1996 22:43:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id WAA20333 for ; Fri, 2 Aug 1996 22:42:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (tibbs@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id AAA14778 for ; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 00:39:20 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199608030539.AAA14778@sina.hpc.uh.edu> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: User wants to be removed from list archives X-Mailer: Mew beta version 0.98 on Emacs 19.30.1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sat, 03 Aug 1996 00:39:18 -0500 From: Jason L Tibbitts III Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I've been waiting for this to happen, and now it has. A user has asked me to remove all of her messages from the archives of one of my lists. Actually she was generous in saying that I could keep the more informative messages, but that I should delete the less useful ones. The list in question started out being dedicated to a musical group, but during long periods where no interesting band-oriented news was about the list members rambled on and became somewhat of a group of friends wasting my bandwidth. Some of the content of the list is offensive (a band member posed nude for a magazine spread, so this is to be somewhat expected). I always made it clear that the list was archived; I even hacked together a nice system for presenting the list archive to the web, and made it Glimpse-searchable and everything. A pointer to the archives is attached to every message from the list. Alta Vista ended up indexing all of it, opening it up to even wider accessibility. There are currently 47 megabytes of archives spanning nearly two years of list traffic. I'm simply not willing to spend the days it would take for me to do the kind of filtering which this user wants. I suppose that if the person makes a big deal of this (which my superiors, as expected, would probably look down upon) my only recourse is to delete the entirety of the archives. Does anyone have any advice? I'm inclined to say "tough luck" and hope that it goes away, but somehow I don't think it's that easy. -- Jason L. Tibbitts III - tibbs@uh.edu - 713/743-8684 - 221SR1 System Manager: University of Houston High Performance Computing Center 1994 PC800 "Kuroneko" DoD# 1723 From list-managers-owner Fri Aug 2 23:22:39 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id XAA22117 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 2 Aug 1996 23:21:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp2.interramp.com (smtp2.interramp.com [38.8.200.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id XAA22110 for ; Fri, 2 Aug 1996 23:21:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [38.11.195.170] by smtp2.interramp.com (8.6.12/SMI-4.1.3-PSI-irsmtp) X-Sender: us014319@pop3.interramp.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199608030539.AAA14778@sina.hpc.uh.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 23:17:23 -0700 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: "Mark E. Taylor" Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Jason wrote: >I've been waiting for this to happen, and now it has. A user has asked me >to remove all of her messages from the archives of one of my lists. >Actually she was generous in saying that I could keep the more informative >messages, but that I should delete the less useful ones. I was under the impression that once you sent a message to be posted to a list, you lost the privacy and ownership of your thoughts in the same manner one sends a letter to the editor of a newspaper. Once a letter is submitted and published, you cannot delete it from the archive because later the person thought the remarks intemperate. And since it is already in an archive for public viewing, I think this person has lost any right to remove postings at this point in time. And considering how much you would have to review, the task may not be possible. Regards, Mark Taylor -- "Cartoon Law: Cognizant Gravity When a cartoon character, such as Willy E. Coyote, races off of a cliff in pursuit of the Road Runner, it will appear that for a few moments that he will defy gravity. Upon realizing though that he is no longer on solid ground, Willy immediately falls to the ground. Scientists call this Cognizant Gravity and only cartoon characters can employ it." Mark Taylor Editor Online Fraud Newsletter From list-managers-owner Sat Aug 3 05:52:35 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id FAA06937 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 05:39:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id FAA06920 for ; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 05:39:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from (alancz@hou-tx10-24.ix.netcom.com [204.32.167.152]) by dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com (8.6.13/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA23252 for ; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 05:35:54 -0700 Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 05:35:54 -0700 Message-Id: <199608031235.FAA23252@dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com> From: alancz@ix.netcom.com (Alan Czarnek) Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >I was under the impression that once you sent a message to be posted to a >list, you lost the privacy and ownership of your thoughts in the same >manner one sends a letter to the editor of a newspaper. ------ This is a good question, I am under the impression that any work of any author is automatically copyrighted by that author (with or without the copyright notice) and publishing that work does not make it public domain......... However, once a message is sent to a public list or to the Usenet, it is difficult to withdraw it from circulation - even if you delete all the messages from your archive, someone else may already have made a copy and have it stored elsewhere. But in any event, no matter where it is stored, it still is a copyrighted work of the author, under the US copyright law......... I am interested in other comments and perspectives on this issue. Alan Cz From list-managers-owner Sat Aug 3 06:52:37 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id GAA09247 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 06:45:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ginger.vnet.net (ginger.vnet.net [166.82.1.69]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id GAA09240 for ; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 06:45:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from katie.vnet.net (murr@katie.vnet.net [166.82.1.7]) by ginger.vnet.net (8.6.13/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA08522 for ; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 08:46:27 -0400 Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA06730 for ; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 09:42:06 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: katie.vnet.net: murr owned process doing -bs Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 09:42:05 -0400 (EDT) From: murr rhame Reply-To: murr rhame To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives In-Reply-To: <199608031235.FAA23252@dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Sat, 3 Aug 1996, Alan Czarnek wrote: > This is a good question, I am under the impression that any work of any > author is automatically copyrighted by that author (with or without the > copyright notice) and publishing that work does not make it public > domain......... Per the Copyright FAQ, this is correct. > However, once a message is sent to a public list or to the Usenet, it > is difficult to withdraw it from circulation... This is also correct. With a publicly and electronicly distributed article, it's impossible to un-publish the information. One could remove the data from the mailing list archives. Off hand, removing one user from the archives sounds like a pain in the butt project. Unless there is some compelling reason to honor the request, I'd tell the subscriber to get over it. Many people say things on the net which they regret later. - murr - From list-managers-owner Sat Aug 3 07:37:36 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id HAA10931 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 07:31:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hahp9k.harte-lyne.ca (hahp9k.harte-lyne.ca [205.206.207.101]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id HAA10917 for ; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 07:31:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ham_hal_g02_u01 ([205.206.207.30]) by hahp9k.harte-lyne.ca (8.7.5/8.7.5) with SMTP id KAA09608; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 10:30:49 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <32035DFF.247A@harte-lyne.ca> Date: Sat, 03 Aug 1996 10:11:11 -0400 From: "James B. Byrne" Organization: Harte & Lyne Limited X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b5aGold (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jason L Tibbitts III CC: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives References: <199608030539.AAA14778@sina.hpc.uh.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >From a customer service point of view it would be better to determine the actual cost of performing the work, double it and tell them that they can have the service performed for the price stated. Then it is their choice. No one can be compelled to work for free. If they accept the fee then you are not out as you are being paid the fee that you determine was fair. If they decide that the work is too expensive then that it their decision. Regards, -- James B. Byrne mailto:byrnejb@harte-lyne.ca Harte & Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca Hamilton, Ontario 905-561-1241 From list-managers-owner Sat Aug 3 08:07:36 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id HAA12940 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 07:54:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.inforamp.net (Mail.InfoRamp.Net [204.191.136.66]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id HAA12922 for ; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 07:54:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Widgette (ts43-16.tor.iSTAR.ca [204.191.141.56]) by mail.inforamp.net (8.7.3/8.7) with SMTP id KAA05923; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 10:44:54 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 10:44:54 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199608031444.KAA05923@mail.inforamp.net> X-Sender: dlj@inforamp.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: alancz@ix.netcom.com (Alan Czarnek) From: David Lloyd-Jones Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 05:35 AM 03/08/96 -0700, Alan Czarnek wrote: >>I was under the impression that once you sent a message to be posted >to a >>list, you lost the privacy and ownership of your thoughts in the same >>manner one sends a letter to the editor of a newspaper. >------ > >This is a good question, I am under the impression that any work of any >author is automatically copyrighted by that author (with or without the >copyright notice) and publishing that work does not make it public >domain......... > Alan's point about copyright is perfectly correct. It is not, however, clear what rights if any this copyright carries, beyond there being a writer's monetary claim wrt any profitable reuse of the text. I think the Net is new news in this regard, and the courts, and maybe an International Convention or two, will clarify this somewhat over the next ten years or so. It does seem to me obvious that if I post messages about my lost cat on all the telephone poles in town, the copyright in the messages is still mine; this does not give me the right to demand that the telephone company clean them all up. -dlj. From list-managers-owner Sat Aug 3 08:52:39 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id IAA15159 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 08:44:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from speedy.grolier.fr (speedy.grolier.fr [194.158.97.87]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id IAA15152 for ; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 08:44:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [194.117.206.108] (ppp-206-108.neuilly.club-internet.fr [194.117.206.108]) by speedy.grolier.fr (8.7.5/MGC-960516) with SMTP id RAA24389 for ; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 17:38:51 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 17:38:51 +0200 (MET DST) X-Sender: ozablock@mail.club-internet.fr (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: ozablock@club-internet.fr (Olivier Zablocki) Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi, When you use a mailing-list, you are a member of a co-operative community. So, It's a point of moral standard to consider that the archives are the common property of the members! It's a scandal to ask for one thing and the contrary : to be ready to use the advantages of co-operative work and to keep the advantages of an entirely individual way of acting. On the Internet and especially on mailing-lists you have to give if you want to receive. How is it possible to give without giving? It is true that the US copyright law and the european laws are insane concerning this point of view. It's not our purpose to change the laws but it's possible to protect ourselves and the co-operative way of working. A simple disposition could be studied concerning this very point : the introduction of an obligatory engagement when people subscribe a mailing list to respect the "free common property" of the archives. olZ Ici, Olivier Zablocki ozablock@club-internet.fr From list-managers-owner Sat Aug 3 08:55:53 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id IAA14868 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 08:38:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from panix2.panix.com (panix2.panix.com [198.7.0.3]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id IAA14833 for ; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 08:38:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from oliver@localhost) by panix2.panix.com (8.7.5/8.7/PanixU1.3) id LAA28524; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 11:35:05 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 11:35:05 -0400 (EDT) From: Oliver Garfield To: Jason L Tibbitts III cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives In-Reply-To: <199608030539.AAA14778@sina.hpc.uh.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Explain to the disgruntled corresponded exactly what you have communicated to the list-managers list pointing out the cost to you and the fact that they had notice of your intention to archive. ASk if they want you to publish a disclaimer for them. I would not do anything. If they don't understand your position, and that it has been widely cross indexed etc just wait. Let them go to an attorney and find out how much it will cost them to take action. Furthermore you are under some constraint as the operator of a public list to accept all comments and publish them. You might just ask them why they want their public comments to be expunged from the record. You after all did nothing except publish, without comment, their own words. *********************************************************************** *Oliver Garfield email: oliver@panix.com * *World Health Foundation phone: 212-877-4230 * *125 Riverside Drive * *New York, NY 10024 * * * *********************************************************************** From list-managers-owner Sat Aug 3 10:07:36 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id KAA21461 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 10:06:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from idyllmtn.com (ayla.idyllmtn.com [206.16.238.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id KAA21454 for ; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 10:06:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by idyllmtn.com (8.6.8/Idyllmtn) From: kynn@idyllmtn.com (Kynn Bartlett) Message-Id: <199608031700.KAA26159@idyllmtn.com> Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives To: byrnejb@harte-lyne.ca (James B. Byrne) Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 10:00:33 -0700 (PDT) Cc: tibbs@hpc.uh.edu, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <32035DFF.247A@harte-lyne.ca> from "James B. Byrne" at Aug 3, 96 10:11:11 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk James Byrne wrote: > From a customer service point of view it would be better to determine > the actual cost of performing the work, double it and tell them that > they can have the service performed for the price stated. Then it is > their choice. No one can be compelled to work for free. I believe that the original writer was from an *.edu address -- and thus he can't really send them a bill for his services. Someone else mentioned telling them "tough cookies" and saying they'd have to sue to get it changed. This won't work well either; no public (or private) university wants to hear that they're getting sued because some computer admin doesn't respect copyrights over some list that university might not even be aware of or officially sanction. (The average university legal department really has no idea what kinds of mailing lists the sysadmins may be running from the CS dept's machines.) --Kynn From list-managers-owner Sat Aug 3 10:10:44 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id JAA20687 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 09:52:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from netcomsv.netcom.com (uucp8.netcom.com [163.179.3.8]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id JAA20680 for ; Sat, 3 Aug 1996 09:52:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from duke.sagarmatha.com by netcomsv.netcom.com with UUCP (8.6.12/SMI-4.1) Received: by duke (Smail3.1.28.1 #64) Message-Id: From: james@sagarmatha.com (James C. Armstrong) Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 07:52:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <32035DFF.247A@harte-lyne.ca> from "James B. Byrne" at Aug 3, 96 10:11:11 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk According to unnamed sources, James B. Byrne is alleged to have written => From a customer service point of view it would be better to determine => the actual cost of performing the work, double it and tell them that => they can have the service performed for the price stated. Then it is => their choice. No one can be compelled to work for free. => => If they accept the fee then you are not out as you are being paid the => fee that you determine was fair. If they decide that the work is too => expensive then that it their decision. A caution: Many employment agreements forbid working outside the job. Also, if the mailing list is on your employer's property, you'd be asking for money to modify your employer's environment. This is a potentially touchy issue for some employers. -- James C. Armstrong, Jr. | From hence, ye beauties, undeceived, james@sagarmatha.com (home) | Know, one false step is ne'er retrieved, | And be with caution bold. | Not all that tempts your wandering eyes | And heedless hearts is lawful prize; | Nor all that glisters gold. From list-managers-owner Sun Aug 4 08:37:41 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id IAA18334 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 4 Aug 1996 08:37:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psyche.mit.edu (PSYCHE.MIT.EDU [18.88.0.85]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id IAA18327 for ; Sun, 4 Aug 1996 08:37:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from starr.mit.edu.mit.edu by psyche.mit.edu (4.1/DA1.0.4) id AA23652; Sun, 4 Aug 96 11:33:36 EDT Date: Sun, 4 Aug 96 11:33:36 EDT From: Eric Loeb Message-Id: <9608041533.AA23652@psyche.mit.edu> To: alancz@ix.netcom.com, dlj@pobox.com Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I want to be removed too! Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam From list-managers-owner Sun Aug 4 13:22:48 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id NAA03447 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 4 Aug 1996 13:14:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from netcomsv.netcom.com (uucp6.netcom.com [163.179.3.6]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id NAA03440 for ; Sun, 4 Aug 1996 13:13:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from duke.sagarmatha.com by netcomsv.netcom.com with UUCP (8.6.12/SMI-4.1) id NAA16316; Sun, 4 Aug 1996 13:02:04 -0700 Received: by duke (Smail3.1.28.1 #64) id m0un8A7-000gczC; Sun, 4 Aug 96 11:44 PDT Message-Id: From: james@sagarmatha.com (James C. Armstrong) Subject: Reply from Compuserve To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 11:44:26 -0700 (PDT) Cc: 100272.3541@compuserve.com X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk A while back, I mentioned that I was forced to move Compuserve subscribers on my mailing lists to digest format because of Compuserve's lack of adherence to accepted Internet standards. Although this did upset several of my subscribers, I felt it was a necessary thing to do (as have several other list managers here). My complaints to Compuserve had gone unanswered. One of my subscribers took it upon himself to make an inquery on his own. (I've asked him if he still has the original of his query.) I sent him a short writeup of my view of the problem, which I will repeat here: :> Basically, the problem is that Compuserve and Wow mis-use the return :> addressing information that accompanies an email message. Each :> messgae has several addresses: :> :> From Used as an envelope address, error messages should be sent here. :> From: The address of the original sender. Used for content-based :> replies, unless Reply-To: is set. :> Reply-To: The address for content-based replies. :> Sender: Used as a reference if mail is forwarded. :> :> When someone sends a message to a mailing list, it should have the :> header changed as follows: :> :> From gets set to the mailing list administrative address. :> From: is unchanged. :> Reply-To: is set to the address of the mailing list. :> Sender: is changed to the administrative address. :> :> When a message encounters a problem, the error message should be sent :> to the From or Sender: addresses, these are administrative messages. :> Instead, Compuserve (and wow, which is owned by Compuserve) uses the :> Reply-To: address. :> :> Fortunately, I've configured the mailing lists so that only members of :> the lists can post. This means that the error messages are rejected, :> but they then fill my mailbox. :> :> If the list were configured so that anyone could post, you then have :> the classical mail-bomb situation. If a message is posted, and a :> compuserve address has a problem, it sends a message to the list, :> which is then forwarded to everybody, including the problem address. :> This error message then generates another error message, and so on. :> If more than one address has a problem, this then explodes :> geometrically, eventually filling everybody's mailboxes with :> Compuserve error messages. :> :> Several mailing list administrators have taken to either excluding :> subscribers from compuserve, or moving them to digests only. I've :> taken the latter step, although I don't like it. Gordon Lamb received an answer from a CompuServe administrator recently, that he forwarded to me today. In it, the administrator indicates that it is Compuserve's policy to discourage Compuserve members from joining Internet mailing lists, furthermore, even though their software is causing a tremendous annoyance to Internet mailing list administrators throughout the globe, they have absolutely no intention of changing their software. I enclose a copy of their response: According to unnamed sources, Gordon Lamb is alleged to have written => Subj: WinCIM Internal Editor Section: CompuServe Software => From: Bob Parsons [Sysop], 111111,2433 #24056 => To: Gordon Lamb, 100272,3541 01 August 1996 11:52:17 => => Hi Gordon, => => We do not encourage mailing lists I am afraid as they tend to encourage junk => mail and therefore we have no plans to make changes to our system in the way you => mention. => => Sorry! => => Regards, => => Bob Gordon has informed me that he is looking to change ISP's as a result of this. I intend to invoke a permanent ban on compuserve subscriptions within the next month (to allow those subscribers to change ISPs). I also intend to publish this response in the news.net-abuse newsgroups. Finally, as a member of a mailing list associated with Internet journalism, I intend to forward a copy of this to that list, should any of those journalists be interested in this story. If any other list administrators are equally so inclined, please drop me a note, and I'll add your support to my efforts. -- James C. Armstrong, Jr. | It's time to taste what you most fear james@sagarmatha.com (home) | Right Guard will not help you here. | Brace yourself, my dear! | It's a holiday in Cambodia! From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 5 01:52:44 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id BAA08485 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 01:51:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from weber.ucsd.edu (weber.ucsd.edu [132.239.147.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id BAA08468 for ; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 01:51:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from cnorman@localhost) by weber.ucsd.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id BAA25689; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 01:51:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 01:51:05 -0700 (PDT) From: Cyndi Norman Message-Id: <199608050851.BAA25689@weber.ucsd.edu> To: tibbs@hpc.uh.edu CC: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, cnorman@weber.ucsd.edu In-reply-to: Jason L Tibbitts III's message of Sat, 03 Aug 1996 00:39:18 -0500 <199608030539.AAA14778@sina.hpc.uh.edu> Subject: User wants to be removed from list archives Reply-to: cnorman@weber.ucsd.edu Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk My two cents: There are several issues going on here, although I am seeing attempts to approach this topic as if it were possible to lump all the issues together. Copyright is one issue people have mentioned, but it's not the underlying issue at hand here. The person asking to be removed from the archives hasn't claimed (to my knowledge) that keeping her messages around is illegal. She just *wants* them removed. Just like the archives/pointers that dejanews and alta vista keep of usenet posts are (IMHO) perfectly legal but that doens't mean I *want* my old posts there. I think it's a reasonable request to ask a list manager to remove your posts from the archives. But it's also reasonable for a list manager to refuse. I offer the removal service for my subscribers (some people have to hide their disabilities from their employees and others are involved in lawsuits). To date, almost no one has asked me to remove anything. In fact, I think I've only been asked to remove one post. And I was asked to remove the snail mail address from someone's .sig on about 5 posts. I insist that the person provide me with the date of the post and header info. No one has asked me so far to do any major editing. I would probably refuse if they did, unless I had a very compelling reason. The reason would be the issue some people here have brought up: major edits are a pain in the butt to do. As far as the ethics of it go, as long as people are informed that their posts go into archives (I state it in the intro message I send to all new subscribers), I'd say you are covered. But, as list managers, we provide services for our subscribers that aren't things any law or rulebook requires us to do. If it's easy for you to edit the archives, I think you *ought* to do it upon request. In the case presented, it would not be an easy task; you have to weigh your time/energy needs with your desire to be "nice" and help someone out. You have done this and have decided against doing it. I can't see how you'd be compelled to do it. Perhaps you can comprimise by offering to remove the 5 or so worst posts (she has to decide which they are and give you exact header info). I would be direct with her and explain that it would take hours upon hours to do. Good luck. Cyndi __________________________________________________________________________ "There's nothing wrong with me. Maybe there's Cyndi Norman something wrong with the universe." (ST:TNG) cnorman@ucsd.edu ___________________________________________ http://weber.ucsd.edu/~cnorman From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 5 06:38:29 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id GAA23955 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 06:33:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psyche.mit.edu (PSYCHE.MIT.EDU [18.88.0.85]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id GAA23948 for ; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 06:32:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from starr.mit.edu.mit.edu by psyche.mit.edu (4.1/DA1.0.4) id AA25698; Mon, 5 Aug 96 09:32:51 EDT Date: Mon, 5 Aug 96 09:32:51 EDT From: Eric Loeb Message-Id: <9608051332.AA25698@psyche.mit.edu> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I'm a stupid individual! > From kynn@idyllmtn.com Sun Aug 4 11:40:42 1996 > Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives > To: loeb@psyche.mit.edu (Eric Loeb) > X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] > Content-Type: text > Content-Length: 7966 > > You're a pretty stupid individual, aren't you? > > > > > I want to be removed too! > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 5 06:43:03 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id GAA24072 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 06:37:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psyche.mit.edu (PSYCHE.MIT.EDU [18.88.0.85]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id GAA24028 for ; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 06:36:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from starr.mit.edu.mit.edu by psyche.mit.edu (4.1/DA1.0.4) id AA25761; Mon, 5 Aug 96 09:36:38 EDT Date: Mon, 5 Aug 96 09:36:38 EDT From: Eric Loeb Message-Id: <9608051336.AA25761@psyche.mit.edu> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Yeah, I sure did! > To: loeb@psyche.mit.edu > Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives > X-Mailer: ScoMail 3.0.Bd > Mime-Version: 1.0 > > On Sun Aug 4 11":37:48 1996 Eric Loeb wrote: > > >From rigel.callemx.com!relay5.uu.net!greatcircle.com!list-managers-owner Sun > Aug 4 11:37:48 1996 > >Date: Sun, 4 Aug 96 11:33:36 EDT > >From: Eric Loeb > >Message-Id: <9608041533.AA23652@psyche.mit.edu> > >To: alancz@ix.netcom.com, dlj@pobox.com > >Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives > >Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com > >Sender: list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com > > > >I want to be removed too! > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > >Spam spam spam spam > > > > And eggs? > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > Donald Loughlin donl@smcs.com SSSS M M CCCC SSSS > Super Micro Computer Systems S MM MM C S > 6 Essex Drive SSSS M M M C SSSS > Hauppauge NY 11788 S M M C S > +1-516-582-3404 FAX +1-516-234-6943 SSSS M M CCCC SSSS > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 5 06:53:30 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id GAA24190 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 06:38:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psyche.mit.edu (PSYCHE.MIT.EDU [18.88.0.85]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id GAA24183 for ; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 06:38:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from starr.mit.edu.mit.edu by psyche.mit.edu (4.1/DA1.0.4) id AA25775; Mon, 5 Aug 96 09:38:44 EDT Date: Mon, 5 Aug 96 09:38:44 EDT From: Eric Loeb Message-Id: <9608051338.AA25775@psyche.mit.edu> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: hurray! Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > From CEO@Citadel.Net Sun Aug 4 13:55:02 1996 > Comments: Authenticated sender is > Organization: Execu/Quest Marketing Consultants > To: Eric Loeb > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT > Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives > Reply-To: CEO@Citadel.Net > Priority: normal > X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.33) > > Greetings! > > Since you wanted to be removed, I've forwarded your email to your ISP > and asked them to remove you for abusing the email service. Hope they > can remove you. > Me too! Thanks for the help. I suspect the problem is not on the end of my "ISP", unfortunately, but every new effort brings us closer to a solution From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 5 07:52:54 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id HAA00524 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 07:44:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from loiosh.kei.com (loiosh.kei.com [192.88.144.32]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id HAA00492 for ; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 07:44:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from ckd@localhost) by loiosh.kei.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA28341; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 10:43:51 -0400 (EDT) To: loeb@psyche.mit.edu CC: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: how to use Internet mailing lists X-Attribution: ckd Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.71) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Christopher Davis Date: 05 Aug 1996 10:43:50 -0400 Message-ID: Lines: 34 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk The standard, for many years, has been to use listname-request@list.host as the administrivia address. I'm fairly certain someone at MIT knows about the -request convention. In the case of list-managers, mail to the -request address results in a message explaining how to use majordomo, and noting that further requests should be sent to majordomo@greatcircle.com. Two of the commands are described as follows: ================================================================ This will unsubscribe the account from which you send the message. If you are subscribed with some other address, you'll have to send a command of the following form instead: unsubscribe list-managers other-address@your_site.your_net If you don't know what address you are subscribed with, you can send the following command to see who else is on the list (assuming that information isn't designated "private" by the owner of the list):o who list-managers ================================================================ A quick string search for "loeb" on the results of that command found: loeb@starr.mit.edu I suggest mailing the command unsubscribe list-managers loeb@starr.mit.edu to majordomo@greatcircle.com From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 5 09:32:41 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id JAA08685 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 09:21:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from idyllmtn.com (ayla.idyllmtn.com [206.16.238.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id JAA08658 for ; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 09:21:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by idyllmtn.com (8.6.8/Idyllmtn) id JAA06843; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 09:19:06 -0700 From: kynn@idyllmtn.com (Kynn Bartlett) Message-Id: <199608051619.JAA06843@idyllmtn.com> Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives To: loeb@psyche.mit.edu (Eric Loeb) Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 09:19:05 -0700 (PDT) Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: <9608051332.AA25698@psyche.mit.edu> from "Eric Loeb" at Aug 5, 96 09:32:51 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Eric Loeb wrote: > I'm a stupid individual! > > From kynn@idyllmtn.com Sun Aug 4 11:40:42 1996 > > Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives > > To: loeb@psyche.mit.edu (Eric Loeb) > > You're a pretty stupid individual, aren't you? > > > [300 lines of] Spam spam spam spam For the record, I'd just like to note that I sent my email directly to Eric, and not to the list. I do not, at all, appreciate his reposting it here, and I'll be writing to his postmaster shortly to complain about his abusive actions on this mailing list. --Kynn Bartlett From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 5 11:22:57 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id LAA17449 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 11:19:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sys2.bloodstockwww.com (sys2.bloodstockwww.com [206.24.34.70]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id LAA17430 for ; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 11:19:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from billy@localhost) by sys2.bloodstockwww.com (8.7.1/8.7.1) id OAA01140 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 14:18:19 -0400 (EDT) From: Bill Antoniadis Message-Id: <199608051818.OAA01140@sys2.bloodstockwww.com> Subject: Please help! To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 14:18:19 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24 ME8a] Content-Type: text Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi, I use Majordomo to occasionally send mail to thousands of our business customers informing them of new products. Our mailing list is password protected so noone else can send mail to it but I have one major problem: Our customers that use AOL seem to get other AOL customer's email addresses attached to the end of our mail. In other words, they can see all the other AOL email addresses from our list. These addresses are attached to the "Apparently-To:" header. If anyone whould know how to prevent that from happening, please help! Billy Billy@bris.com or SysAdmin@bris.com From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 5 11:53:01 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id LAA18809 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 11:40:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from E-MAIL.COM (e-mail.com [199.171.26.5]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id LAA18793 for ; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 11:40:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199608051840.LAA18793@miles.greatcircle.com> Received: from us.ibm.com by E-MAIL.COM (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with BSMTP id 7709; Mon, 05 Aug 96 14:40:23 EDT Date: Mon, 05 Aug 1996 14:39:52 EDT From: jcanterbury@us.ibm.com To: list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: note of 08/05/96 14:28 X-Sender-Info: Jerry L. Canterbury t/l 372-3302 B183, 2J145 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Please help! Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Bill Antoniadis wrote: >In other words, they can see >the other AOL email addresses from our list. These addresses are attach >to the "Apparently-To:" header. Does this happen even when you use the BCC instead of TO to address your mail? Jerry Canterbury, Buckeye Consulting Internet: jcanterbury@us.ibm.com or jcanterb@worldweb.net http://www.worldweb.net/~jcanterb From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 5 12:52:51 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id MAA21774 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 12:39:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psyche.mit.edu (PSYCHE.MIT.EDU [18.88.0.85]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id MAA21765; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 12:39:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from starr.mit.edu.mit.edu by psyche.mit.edu (4.1/DA1.0.4) id AA28098; Mon, 5 Aug 96 15:39:02 EDT Date: Mon, 5 Aug 96 15:39:02 EDT From: Eric Loeb Message-Id: <9608051939.AA28098@psyche.mit.edu> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com, loeb@psyche.mit.edu Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives Cc: list-managers-approval@greatcircle.com Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I am so stupid. stupid stupid stupid Don't you want me off this list? > From list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Mon Aug 5 09:52:49 1996 > To: list-managers@greatcircle.com > Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives > Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM > > > I'm a stupid individual! > > > > From kynn@idyllmtn.com Sun Aug 4 11:40:42 1996 > > Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives > > To: loeb@psyche.mit.edu (Eric Loeb) > > X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] > > Content-Type: text > > Content-Length: 7966 > > > > You're a pretty stupid individual, aren't you? > > > > > > > > I want to be removed too! > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > Spam spam spam spam > > > > > > > > > > > From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 5 16:07:45 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id PAA06935 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 15:53:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.eskimo.com (mail.eskimo.com [204.122.16.4]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id PAA06926 for ; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 15:53:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eskimo.com (jimo@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA09193; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 15:53:24 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Osborn Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.5) id PAA26909; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 15:52:45 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 15:52:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199608052252.PAA26909@eskimo.com> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: AOL lost its MIME? Cc: support@aol.com, techsupport@aol.com Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk A few weeks ago several of my digest subscribers on AOL began complaining that "all the headers are missing" from the digest articles. It's a SmartList 3.10 list, and the digests are sent as MIME multipart digests, and of course the individual article headers are there; it just seems that as of a few weeks ago AOL readers have lost their ability to see them. I know that AOL binary attachments are MIME encoded (they apparently used to understand uuencode too, but no longer), so you'd think they'd be able to make sense of MIME multipart digests too. Is anyone familiar enough with AOL to know what I should advise my poor AOL subscribers to do, other than "contact AOL tech support?" Does anyone know who I should contact at AOL to ask this same question? Thanks in advance, jimo@eskimo.com From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 5 16:37:41 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id QAA08047 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 16:24:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.eskimo.com (mail.eskimo.com [204.122.16.4]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id QAA08036 for ; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 16:24:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eskimo.com (jimo@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA15126; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 16:24:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Osborn Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.5) id QAA04986; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 16:23:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 16:23:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199608052323.QAA04986@eskimo.com> To: james@sagarmatha.com, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk james@sagarmatha.com (James C. Armstrong) writes: >A while back, I mentioned that I was forced to move Compuserve >subscribers on my mailing lists to digest format because of Compuserve's >lack of adherence to accepted Internet standards. >... >:> When someone sends a message to a mailing list, it should have the >:> header changed as follows: >:> ... >:> Reply-To: is set to the address of the mailing list. Really bad idea to point the Reply-To: at the list. Aside from the mail-storm potential James describes (and you can't always trust the non-subscriber-post filters to prevent them), keep in mind that some subscribers may need their own Reply-To: headers, so that they can receive email. A number of my subscribers' ISPs force From: lines on them that aren't valid reception addresses, and there's nothing they can do about it, except add a Reply-To: line with their correct address. If my list had its own Reply-To: line, they'd be out of luck. This is not to condone Compuserve's misconfiguration, but they're not the only misconfigured ISP out there. Why subject your list to this risk of a mail-storm? Another reason to avoid Reply-To:s is social: many a flame war has been contained by having those heat-of-the-moment remarks go only to one recipient. If they'd been sent to the entire list, the resulting storm of the various sides shouting each other down can cause good people to unsubscribe. Better it takes a tiny bit more effort to hit the whole list, when minds aren't thinking clearly. Cheers, jimo@eskimo.com From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 5 17:37:48 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id RAA14108 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 17:32:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psyche.mit.edu (PSYCHE.MIT.EDU [18.88.0.85]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id RAA14101 for ; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 17:32:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from starr.mit.edu.mit.edu by psyche.mit.edu (4.1/DA1.0.4) id AA29518; Mon, 5 Aug 96 20:32:37 EDT Date: Mon, 5 Aug 96 20:32:37 EDT From: Eric Loeb Message-Id: <9608060032.AA29518@psyche.mit.edu> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: A disgrace! Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > From kjetilho@ifi.uio.no Mon Aug 5 16:06:55 1996 > To: loeb@psyche.mit.edu > Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives > > You are a disgrace to MIT. > > > Kjetil T. > I am a disgrace to MIT! Please stop me before I spam again! From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 5 19:37:50 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id TAA20100 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 19:31:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from garcon.unicom.com (garcon.unicom.com [192.108.105.37]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id TAA20093 for ; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 19:31:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from chip@localhost) by garcon.unicom.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id VAA15742; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 21:34:09 -0500 (CDT) From: Chip Rosenthal Message-Id: <199608060234.VAA15742@garcon.unicom.com> Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve To: jimo@eskimo.com (Jim Osborn) Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 21:34:08 -0500 (CDT) Cc: james@sagarmatha.com, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <199608052323.QAA04986@eskimo.com> from "Jim Osborn" at Aug 05, 1996 04:23:35 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL0a10] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Jim Osborn writes: > Really bad idea to point the Reply-To: at the list. Seconded. I've got a paper that beats this issue to a bloody pulp. It's at . Unless you are dead set in your ways (pro or con), I'd urge folks to take a gander. -- Chip Rosenthal * Unicom Systems Development * Unix system programming/support * Internet * test/ctrl/comm systems URL: http://www.unicom.com/ * 48 68 D8 BE 10 C8 6B DE 60 17 00 0B A7 83 99 8E From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 5 22:38:06 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id WAA27389 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 22:34:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) id WAA27381 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 22:34:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tymix.Tymnet.COM (tymix.tymnet.com [131.146.2.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id QAA05124 for ; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 16:35:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by tymix.Tymnet.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA29734; Thu, 1 Aug 96 16:30:42 PDT Received: from tardis by tymix.Tymnet.COM (in.smtpd); 1 Aug 0 16:30:41 PDT Received: by tardis.tymnet.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA12465; Thu, 1 Aug 96 16:32:49 PDT Date: Thu, 1 Aug 96 16:32:49 PDT From: jms@tardis.Tymnet.COM (Joe Smith) Message-Id: <9608012332.AA12465@tardis.tymnet.com> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Unsubscribing 3rd party from various lists? Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Forgive me if this is off-topic, but I am looking for information on how a sysadmin can deal with cancelled users that were on various mailing lists. Here is something that comes up all the time: An employee leaves the company, his account is cancelled, and then the postmaster of the local system starts getting notification of bounce messages. The user had to some LISTSERV lists, some MAJORDOMO lists, and who knows what else. What does the sysadmin at the destination host do to stop this unwanted mail? It appears that LISTSERV demands that you re-activate the account long enough to send an UNSUBSCRIBE request, assuming that the mail is not being forwarded from some unknown alias. In one case, I send mail to OWNER-listname and listname-REQUEST, got no bounces, but mail continued to arrive. After three months, I resent the unsubscribe request to OWNER-listname, listname-REQUEST, listname-OUT and listname-DISTRIBUTION. Only then did the list owner respond. Does anyone one this list have a nice cheat-sheet with the following? 1) How to recognize what type of list (listserv, majordomo, etc). 2) What steps are required for a third-party "unsubscribe" request. -Joe From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 6 00:38:27 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id AAA04594 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 00:06:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) id AAA04570 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 00:05:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay1.shore.net (relay1.shore.net [192.233.85.129]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id AAA03699 for ; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 00:43:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smoe.org (jeffw@smoe.org [204.167.97.154]) by relay1.shore.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA27754 for ; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 03:43:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: by smoe.org (4.1/SMI-4.1-hack1) id AA25253; Mon, 5 Aug 96 03:43:33 EDT Date: Mon, 5 Aug 96 03:43:33 EDT From: jeffw@smoe.org (Jeff Wasilko) Message-Id: <9608050743.AA25253@smoe.org> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: help needed w/ forged mail (attack on list) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk One of the mailing lists I manage is being attacked by a forger...I can't stop him because he is forging the addresses of list members (and the list has been restricted to list-members since the Krazy Kevin days). I suspect he's using Alternet's dialup network to send the message. I've contacted their NOC, as well as Bellcore (since it looks like he used their mail server). The message he forged thru Bellcore was send 20+ times..The other one (from Syracuse) was only sent once... Can someone confirm that I'm on the right track? Is there anything I can do while I wait for UUnet's legal department to get back to me? Here's a couple of sample messages: >From majordom Sun Aug 4 16:49:11 1996 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by smoe.org (4.1/SMI-4.1-hack1) id AA17835; Sun, 4 Aug 96 16:49:05 EDT Received: by smoe.org (bulk_mailer v1.5); Sun, 4 Aug 1996 16:49:05 -0400 Received: by smoe.org (4.1/SMI-4.1-hack1) id AA17822; Sun, 4 Aug 96 16:49:02 EDT Received: from mailbox.syr.edu by smoe.org (4.1/SMI-4.1-hack1) id AA17816; Sun, 4 Aug 96 16:48:58 EDT Received: from hydra.syr.edu (root@hydra.syr.edu [128.230.1.33]) by mailbox.syr.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA14968 for ; Sun, 4 Aug 1996 16:48:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pool025.Max29.New-York.NY.DYNIP.ALTER.NET (pool025.Max29.New-York.NY.DYNIP.ALTER.NET [153.37.72.153]) by hydra.syr.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA15397 for ; Sun, 4 Aug 1996 16:48:34 -0400 (EDT) From: bmeskin@mailbox.syr.edu Message-Id: <199608042048.QAA15397@hydra.syr.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: hydra.syr.edu: Host pool025.Max29.New-York.NY.DYNIP.ALTER.NET [153.37.72.153] didn't use HELO protocol Date: 04 Aug 96 5:11:30 PM To: jewel@smoe.org Subject: Every one look out! Sender: owner-jewel@smoe.org X-To-Unsubscribe: Send mail to "jewel-request@smoe.org" X-To-Unsubscribe: with "unsubscribe" as the body. Precedence: bulk Status: RO Okay everyone listen up. I am the Mad Jewel Bomber. I have your list at my mercy. If you people don't wnat all sorts of hell and damnation to rain down upon you you will give in to my list of demands, which will be forth coming soon, so watch for it. By the way in case you fools haven't figured it out I.m not Bret I`m just borrowing his moniker for this message, i'll show up as some one else next. >From majordom Mon Aug 5 00:28:26 1996 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by smoe.org (4.1/SMI-4.1-hack1) id AA21356; Mon, 5 Aug 96 00:28:14 EDT Received: by smoe.org (bulk_mailer v1.5); Mon, 5 Aug 1996 00:28:13 -0400 Received: by smoe.org (4.1/SMI-4.1-hack1) id AA21217; Mon, 5 Aug 96 00:27:32 EDT Received: from thumper.bellcore.com (thumper-13.bellcore.com) by smoe.org (4.1/SMI-4.1-hack1) id AA21091; Mon, 5 Aug 96 00:26:32 EDT Received: from (pool032.Max11.New-York.NY.DYNIP.ALTER.NET [153.37.41.32]) by thumper.bellcore.com (8.6.12/8.6.11) with SMTP id AAA27825 for ; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 00:26:09 -0400 From: jewelfan@juno.com Message-Id: <199608050426.AAA27825@thumper.bellcore.com> Date: 05 Aug 96 12:48:56 AM To: jewel@smoe.org Subject: Listen up!!! Sender: owner-jewel@smoe.org X-To-Unsubscribe: Send mail to "jewel-request@smoe.org" X-To-Unsubscribe: with "unsubscribe" as the body. Precedence: bulk Status: RO Alright you sorry fuckheads! I'm hear to tell you I am not to be ignored!! If you people contiue to ignore my posts, I'll be forced to make Jewel mute. Then what will you pathetic, no-life, losers do. Your's truly the Mad Jewel Bomber!!! From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 6 01:09:00 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id AAA08373 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 00:57:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ginger.vnet.net (ginger.vnet.net [166.82.1.69]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id AAA08189 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 00:57:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from katie.vnet.net (murr@katie.vnet.net [166.82.1.7]) by ginger.vnet.net (8.6.13/8.6.12) with ESMTP id DAA02778 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 03:01:42 -0400 Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA27594 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 03:56:52 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: katie.vnet.net: murr owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 03:56:51 -0400 (EDT) From: murr rhame To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: help needed w/ forged mail (attack on list) In-Reply-To: <9608050743.AA25253@smoe.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Mon, 5 Aug 1996, Jeff Wasilko wrote: > One of the mailing lists I manage is being attacked by a forger...I > can't stop him because he is forging the addresses of list members (and > the list has been restricted to list-members since the Krazy Kevin > days). As far as I know, the only sure cure for a forged address spam attack, is to use a moderated list. You can cut down on the possibility a bit by using a concealed subscriber list... Concealing the subscriber list only limits the forger to using the addresses of those who have posted. If there are techniques other than moderation or working with the sysadmin of the spammer's home, I'd like to know more about it. Speaking of Crazy Kevin, I've not been hit by him for a couple of months. Did AOL's lawyers finally catch up with Kevin? - murr - From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 6 02:08:19 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id CAA17289 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 02:01:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ginger.vnet.net (ginger.vnet.net [166.82.1.69]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id CAA17275 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 02:00:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from katie.vnet.net (murr@katie.vnet.net [166.82.1.7]) by ginger.vnet.net (8.6.13/8.6.12) with ESMTP id EAA03236 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 04:05:34 -0400 Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA28703 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 05:00:05 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: katie.vnet.net: murr owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 05:00:04 -0400 (EDT) From: murr rhame To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve In-Reply-To: <199608060234.VAA15742@garcon.unicom.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Mon, 5 Aug 1996, Chip Rosenthal wrote: > Jim Osborn writes: > > Really bad idea to point the Reply-To: at the list. > > Seconded. I've got a paper that beats this issue to a bloody pulp. > It's at . Unless > you are dead set in your ways (pro or con), I'd urge folks to take > a gander. I'm not dead set in favor of Reply-To: list-address. On the other hand, I've been hosting and or listowning several lists with a few hundred subscribers each. All are under listproc with the Reply-To pointing to the list. Other than the rare misdirected private reply, I've had no problems. I've never seen a loop with listproc. I will look at you article on the issue. My Compu$erve subscribers have no more problems than any other group of subscribers (filled mailboxes, new address and similar admistrivia). My biggest pains are the bounce-forevers [tm] from the UK. - murr - From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 6 06:23:00 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id GAA29031 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 06:20:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from netcomsv.netcom.com (uucp5.netcom.com [163.179.3.5]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id GAA29024 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 06:20:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from duke.sagarmatha.com by netcomsv.netcom.com with UUCP (8.6.12/SMI-4.1) id GAA06000; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 06:18:21 -0700 Received: by duke (Smail3.1.28.1 #64) id m0unlWe-000gczC; Tue, 6 Aug 96 05:46 PDT Message-Id: From: james@sagarmatha.com (James C. Armstrong) Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 05:46:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: from "murr rhame" at Aug 6, 96 05:00:04 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk According to unnamed sources, murr rhame is alleged to have written => On Mon, 5 Aug 1996, Chip Rosenthal wrote: => > Jim Osborn writes: => > > Really bad idea to point the Reply-To: at the list. => > Seconded. I've got a paper that beats this issue to a bloody pulp. => > It's at . Unless => > you are dead set in your ways (pro or con), I'd urge folks to take => > a gander. => I'm not dead set in favor of Reply-To: list-address. On the other hand, => I've been hosting and or listowning several lists with a few hundred => subscribers each. All are under listproc with the Reply-To pointing to => the list. Other than the rare misdirected private reply, I've had no => problems. I've never seen a loop with listproc. I will look at you => article on the issue. The lists that I administer are intended for group discussions; by concensus of the members we feel that Reply-To is the best solution. Group replies, such as this message, result in some folks receiving multiple copies, since all too often people do not edit the To: line in headers, if that is even an option in their mailer. Most of my list members are not computer savvy. (I note that even some of the list manager members replying to this thread have sent double notes, due to not editing the headers! If we, who are expected to be among the most email-savvy, are too lazy to do this, or forget, how can we fairly expect our list members to do the same?) This begs the question: Should we all be required to add this "burden" to our list members because a large ISP refuses to conform to accepted standards and a published RFC? If so, what is the value of other RFC's? => My Compu$erve subscribers have no more problems than any other group of => subscribers (filled mailboxes, new address and similar admistrivia). My => biggest pains are the bounce-forevers [tm] from the UK. I set my error-return address to a filter that attempts to perform some basic administrative functions, such as unsubscribing addresses that are returned as non-existant. The messages that get bounced back as being sent to the list but not from a subscriber (it is a closed list) are not filtered that way, instead, I look at each to see if a subscriber's address has changed, etc... Since the list gets somewhere around 40 messages a day, if a mailbox for a Compuserve user is filled, and I'm out of town for a couple days, that's a lot of mail to filter. Since most of my subscribers are UK, could you please explain the "bounce-forevers"? -- James C. Armstrong, Jr. | It's time to taste what you most fear james@sagarmatha.com (home) | Right Guard will not help you here. | Brace yourself, my dear! | It's a holiday in Cambodia! From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 6 08:52:56 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id IAA10146 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 08:46:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from camco.celestial.com (camco.celestial.com [192.136.111.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id IAA10138 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 08:46:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by camco.celestial.com (Smail3.1.29.1 #1) id m0unoNV-000F6YC; Tue, 6 Aug 96 08:49 PDT Message-Id: From: bill@celestial.com (Bill Campbell) Subject: Re: Unsubscribing 3rd party from various lists? To: jms@tardis.Tymnet.COM (Joe Smith) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 08:49:02 -0700 (PDT) Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: <9608012332.AA12465@tardis.tymnet.com> from "Joe Smith" at Aug 1, 96 04:32:49 pm Reply-To: bill@Celestial.COM Organization: Celestial Software, Mercer Island, WA 98040 X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > >Forgive me if this is off-topic, but I am looking for information on how a >sysadmin can deal with cancelled users that were on various mailing lists. > >Here is something that comes up all the time: > An employee leaves the company, his account is cancelled, and then > the postmaster of the local system starts getting notification of > bounce messages. > ..... I've had some of our ISP customers ask this same question, and my thought is to create a dead-user alias for deleted accounts, and process that alias with a deliver script (or procmail if that suits you better). This script would look at the headers and send a message back to the list manager saying that this account is no longer on the systems in such a manner that the list manager will be sure that it's really a bad account and not just another mailer glitch where somebody's screwed up their alias file. Once this message goes out, I would add the list-manager/email-address into a database so that only one messages goes out. The script would then just drop the mail into /dev/null for this and any subsequent messages. So far, I haven't had time to do this, (or to ask this list if somebody's already done something similar :-). Bill -- INTERNET: bill@Celestial.COM Bill Campbell; Celestial Systems, Inc. UUCP: camco!bill PO Box 820; 2835 82nd Avenue S.E. S-100 FAX: (206) 232-9186 Mercer Island, WA 98040-0820; (206) 236-1676 URL: http://www.celestial.com/ The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. Instead of altering their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit their views ... which can be very uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that needs altering. -- Doctor Who, "Face of Evil" From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 6 09:54:21 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id JAA15709 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 09:44:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hera.cuci.nl (hera.cuci.nl [194.183.100.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id JAA15644 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 09:44:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from srb@localhost) by hera.cuci.nl (8.7.5/BuGless_1.02) id SAA25694; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 18:42:57 +0200 Message-Id: <199608061642.SAA25694@hera.cuci.nl> From: srb@cuci.nl (Stephen R. van den Berg) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 18:42:57 +0200 In-Reply-To: bill@Celestial.COM's message as of 1996 Aug 6 Tue 8:49. To: bill@Celestial.COM, jms@tardis.Tymnet.COM (Joe Smith) Subject: Re: Unsubscribing 3rd party from various lists? Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk bill@Celestial.COM wrote: >>Forgive me if this is off-topic, but I am looking for information on how a >>sysadmin can deal with cancelled users that were on various mailing lists. >I've had some of our ISP customers ask this same question, and my >thought is to create a dead-user alias for deleted accounts, and >you better). This script would look at the headers and send a message >back to the list manager saying that this account is no longer on the >systems in such a manner that the list manager will be sure that it's >really a bad account and not just another mailer glitch where >somebody's screwed up their alias file. Once this message goes out, I >would add the list-manager/email-address into a database so that only >one messages goes out. The script would then just drop the mail into >/dev/null for this and any subsequent messages. Very bad idea. What if the list-manager misses this one message for some reason? Endless heaps of bandwidth wasted, since the address will stay on the list forever. I'd say, just bounce it with a user-unknown message. That tends to work best. -- Sincerely, srb@cuci.nl Stephen R. van den Berg (AKA BuGless). "Be spontaneous!" From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 6 10:08:30 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id KAA16949 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 10:06:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id KAA16932 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 10:06:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mne.ifi.uio.no (1232@mne.ifi.uio.no [129.240.70.5]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 19:06:38 +0200 From: Kjetil Torgrim Homme Received: (from kjetilho@localhost) by mne.ifi.uio.no ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 19:06:37 +0200 Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 19:06:37 +0200 Message-Id: <199608061706.9039.mne.ifi.uio.no@ifi.uio.no> To: james@sagarmatha.com CC: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-reply-to: (james@sagarmatha.com) Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk [James C. Armstrong] | The lists that I administer are intended for group discussions; by | concensus of the members we feel that Reply-To is the best | solution. Group replies, such as this message, result in some | folks receiving multiple copies, since all too often people do not | edit the To: line in headers It's a feature, especially on large lists with long distribution delays or digests. That way, a dialogue can have a quicker pace than the mailing list host can maintain. | if that is even an option in their mailer. Well, then they shouldn't be using that program. There's no reason to use bad software, especially as there are good, free programs available. Kjetil T. From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 6 12:37:56 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id MAA02458 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 12:36:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (searn.sunet.se [192.36.125.4]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id MAA02397 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 12:36:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199608061936.MAA02397@miles.greatcircle.com> Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE by SEARN.SUNET.SE (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with BSMTP id 3114; Tue, 06 Aug 96 21:33:03 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin ERIC@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2b/1.8b) with RFC822 id 2917; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 21:33:03 +0200 Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 21:06:42 +0200 From: Eric Thomas Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Message of Tue, 6 Aug 1996 19:06:37 +0200 from list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Tue, 6 Aug 1996 19:06:37 +0200 Kjetil Torgrim Homme said: >[James C. Armstrong] > >| The lists that I administer are intended for group discussions; by >| concensus of the members we feel that Reply-To is the best >| solution. Group replies, such as this message, result in some >| folks receiving multiple copies, since all too often people do not >| edit the To: line in headers > >It's a feature, especially on large lists with long distribution >delays or digests. That way, a dialogue can have a quicker pace than >the mailing list host can maintain. Perhaps this made sense a few years ago (and it would still be a matter of personal opinion), but we're in 1996. Today you can buy a very fast Internet server for not much money at all. Now I'm not saying that there aren't many sites where the boss doesn't think upgrading the machines is a good idea and where the mailing list host still needs 30-60 min to process postings, all I'm saying is that this is changing very quickly and the many people who have a machine with a turnaround time of 1 minute or less are going to base their habits on the speed of the machine they are using, and not on problems that may have existed a few years ago before they upgraded. Here is the kind of statistics you can expect with previous generation equipment: Total: 166,690 deliveries +--------------------------+--------------------------+------------+ | Average delivery time | Max delivery time | For... | +--------------------------+--------------------------+------------+ | 3 sec (00:03) | 8 sec (00:08) | First 50% | | 5 sec (00:05) | 13 sec (00:13) | First 60% | | 6 sec (00:06) | 21 sec (00:21) | First 70% | | 8 sec (00:08) | 26 sec (00:26) | First 80% | | 11 sec (00:11) | 35 sec (00:35) | First 90% | | 12 sec (00:12) | 55 sec (00:55) | First 95% | | 13 sec (00:13) | 72 sec (01:12) | First 96% | | 14 sec (00:14) | 130 sec (02:10) | First 97% | | 17 sec (00:17) | 785 sec (13:05) | First 98% | | 27 sec (00:27) | 1596 sec (26:36) | First 99% | | 216 sec (03:36) | 334125 sec (3d 20:48:45) | All (100%) | +--------------------------+--------------------------+------------+ As you can see, half of the messages were delivered in less than 8 seconds. The average delivery time, setting aside the usual 1% of addresses for brain-dead mail systems that support a grand total of one parallel connection or are up 2 hours a day, is 27 seconds. This turbo-charged super-server is a 133MHz Pentium with 64M and one drive. This machine also runs a web server from which people can browse the archives and make searches. There are 123 lists ranging from a handful of subscribers to 1,400 or so. It's far from being the largest mailing list site in the world, but it can probably handle the needs of 99.x% of existing mailing list sites, and it's really not much hardware at all. It's only a matter of time until most lists run on that kind of system. I give it a year, perhaps two. Eric From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 6 13:37:58 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id NAA12152 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 13:35:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id NAA12076 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 13:35:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mne.ifi.uio.no (1232@mne.ifi.uio.no [129.240.70.5]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 22:35:02 +0200 From: Kjetil Torgrim Homme Received: (from kjetilho@localhost) by mne.ifi.uio.no ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 22:35:00 +0200 Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 22:35:00 +0200 Message-Id: <199608062035.9089.mne.ifi.uio.no@ifi.uio.no> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-reply-to: <199608061936.MAA02397@miles.greatcircle.com> (message from Eric Thomas on Tue, 6 Aug 1996 21:06:42 +0200) Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk [Kjetil T. Homme] | It's a feature, especially on large lists with long distribution | delays or digests. That way, a dialogue can have a quicker pace | than the mailing list host can maintain. [Eric Thomas] | Perhaps this made sense a few years ago (and it would still be a | matter of personal opinion), but we're in 1996. Today you can buy | a very fast Internet server for not much money at all. It still makes sense when one of the correspondents are on the digest. | [impressive statistics from a P133 elided] | | It's only a matter of time until most lists run on that kind of | system. I give it a year, perhaps two. A good portion of the mailing lists out there are based on Sendmail aliases, and I don't think that will change much. Speaking as a postmaster, I don't care if the lists I host take an hour until they reach the last recipient, and I won't install special software to fix it. Unless Sendmail sees some serious optimization regarding long recipient lists, you're too optimistic. Kjetil T. From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 6 13:43:36 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id NAA10591 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 13:25:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from antares.mcs.anl.gov (mcs.anl.gov [140.221.9.6]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id NAA10564 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 13:25:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mcs.anl.gov (obie.mcs.anl.gov [140.221.5.129]) by antares.mcs.anl.gov (8.6.10/8.6.10) with ESMTP id PAA05026; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 15:24:21 -0500 Message-Id: <199608062024.PAA05026@antares.mcs.anl.gov> To: Eric Thomas cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 06 Aug 1996 21:06:42 +0200." <199608061936.MAA02397@miles.greatcircle.com> Date: Tue, 06 Aug 1996 15:24:13 -0500 From: Gene Rackow Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Eric, You are correct, we are in 1996, but not all of the world is yet up to that level, nor can they afford to be. The biggest cost in the system is not the machine, but the size of the pipe you have to the outside world. Just as important is the speeds of the pipes you are attaching to. Nothing like having a fast link only to find that many of the remotes are running off of something really slow. You have missed a major consideration in your posting of the chart. That being what the distribution of your mail looks like. If all of the machines you are connecting to are also well connected, then the speeds and feeds are going to be reasonable. How many domains or mailhosts are you connecting to in your lists? If it's really just an internal company exploder, or mostly well connected edu and com sites than things are fast. If on the other hand your mailing list is made up of a couple thousand addresses covering about 100 top level domains and 1500 second level domains, then things are going to run alot slower than you proclaim. I know of a number of sites that are 9600 baud connections. Start filling those and not matter what speed machine you have, things are going to be slow. Chances are you also have your time limit set to the last entry in your table. The mail didn't really go though, but bounced. There are many machines that go down for 3 or 4 days at a shot. --Gene Eric Thomas made the following keystrokes: >On Tue, 6 Aug 1996 19:06:37 +0200 Kjetil Torgrim Homme > said: > >>[James C. Armstrong] >> >>| The lists that I administer are intended for group discussions; by >>| concensus of the members we feel that Reply-To is the best >>| solution. Group replies, such as this message, result in some >>| folks receiving multiple copies, since all too often people do not >>| edit the To: line in headers >> >>It's a feature, especially on large lists with long distribution >>delays or digests. That way, a dialogue can have a quicker pace than >>the mailing list host can maintain. > >Perhaps this made sense a few years ago (and it would still be a matter >of personal opinion), but we're in 1996. Today you can buy a very fast >Internet server for not much money at all. Now I'm not saying that there >aren't many sites where the boss doesn't think upgrading the machines is >a good idea and where the mailing list host still needs 30-60 min to >process postings, all I'm saying is that this is changing very quickly >and the many people who have a machine with a turnaround time of 1 minute >or less are going to base their habits on the speed of the machine they >are using, and not on problems that may have existed a few years ago >before they upgraded. Here is the kind of statistics you can expect with >previous generation equipment: > >Total: 166,690 deliveries > >+--------------------------+--------------------------+------------+ >| Average delivery time | Max delivery time | For... | >+--------------------------+--------------------------+------------+ >| 3 sec (00:03) | 8 sec (00:08) | First 50% | >| 5 sec (00:05) | 13 sec (00:13) | First 60% | >| 6 sec (00:06) | 21 sec (00:21) | First 70% | >| 8 sec (00:08) | 26 sec (00:26) | First 80% | >| 11 sec (00:11) | 35 sec (00:35) | First 90% | >| 12 sec (00:12) | 55 sec (00:55) | First 95% | >| 13 sec (00:13) | 72 sec (01:12) | First 96% | >| 14 sec (00:14) | 130 sec (02:10) | First 97% | >| 17 sec (00:17) | 785 sec (13:05) | First 98% | >| 27 sec (00:27) | 1596 sec (26:36) | First 99% | >| 216 sec (03:36) | 334125 sec (3d 20:48:45) | All (100%) | >+--------------------------+--------------------------+------------+ > >As you can see, half of the messages were delivered in less than 8 >seconds. The average delivery time, setting aside the usual 1% of >addresses for brain-dead mail systems that support a grand total of one >parallel connection or are up 2 hours a day, is 27 seconds. This >turbo-charged super-server is a 133MHz Pentium with 64M and one drive. >This machine also runs a web server from which people can browse the >archives and make searches. There are 123 lists ranging from a handful of >subscribers to 1,400 or so. It's far from being the largest mailing list >site in the world, but it can probably handle the needs of 99.x% of >existing mailing list sites, and it's really not much hardware at all. >It's only a matter of time until most lists run on that kind of system. I >give it a year, perhaps two. > > Eric > From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 6 14:38:46 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id OAA20685 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 14:29:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sacmgr.mp.usbr.gov (sacmgr.mp.usbr.gov [140.214.12.4]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id OAA20676 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 14:29:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by sacto.mp.usbr.gov (MX V4.2 VAX) id 24; Tue, 06 Aug 1996 14:28:58 PDT Date: Tue, 06 Aug 1996 14:28:54 PDT From: "Henry W. Miller" To: kjetilho@ifi.uio.no CC: list-managers@greatcircle.com, henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009A672C.0F7765AE.24@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > From: MX%"kjetilho@ifi.uio.no" 6-AUG-1996 13:41:27.89 > Subj: Re: Reply from Compuserve > [Kjetil T. Homme] > > | It's a feature, especially on large lists with long distribution > | delays or digests. That way, a dialogue can have a quicker pace > | than the mailing list host can maintain. > > [Eric Thomas] > > | Perhaps this made sense a few years ago (and it would still be a > | matter of personal opinion), but we're in 1996. Today you can buy > | a very fast Internet server for not much money at all. > > It still makes sense when one of the correspondents are on the digest. > > | [impressive statistics from a P133 elided] > | > | It's only a matter of time until most lists run on that kind of > | system. I give it a year, perhaps two. > > A good portion of the mailing lists out there are based on Sendmail > aliases, and I don't think that will change much. Speaking as a > postmaster, I don't care if the lists I host take an hour until they > reach the last recipient, and I won't install special software to fix > it. Unless Sendmail sees some serious optimization regarding long > recipient lists, you're too optimistic. > > > Kjetil T. I think that part of it needs to be user education and setting a reasonable expectation on the part of the subscribers. I run several mailing lists on a VAX cluster, running VMS (obviously) with a VAX 8350 and a MicroVAX II (Honest!) with the MX software. I have one major, high traffic list with well over 400 subscribers, all over the world. I tell my people that it can take up to 4 hours to process one message. In fact, when the moon has been in the right phase, and NONE of the receiving hosts are down, I've actually seen it process the entire list in under an hour. Granted, a 133 Mhz Pentium could stomp the snot out of the cluster for pure processing speed. Why list managers get grey, and why I'm going to have to dye my hair before I get a portrait taken: (I'm serious...) I had one (l)user on my lists, from South Africa, post a BS piece of tripe to a list three times within an hour. I asked him why. He responded that he had expected to see his message sent back to him, and because it wasn't echoed back within a few minutes, he sent it again, and again... EEEERRRRYYYYAAAHHHH!!!!! Have a good day, all, -HWM From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 6 16:07:46 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id QAA03337 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 16:00:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from digital.netvoyage.net (digital.netvoyage.net [205.162.154.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id QAA03330 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 16:00:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (brozen@localhost) by digital.netvoyage.net (8.6.13/8.6.9) with SMTP id PAA20538; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 15:59:44 -0700 Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 15:59:44 -0700 (PDT) From: Brock Rozen Reply-To: Brock Rozen To: Eric Thomas cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve In-Reply-To: <199608061936.MAA02397@miles.greatcircle.com> Message-ID: X-URL: http://www.netvoyage.net/~brozen MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Tue, 6 Aug 1996, Eric Thomas wrote: > Total: 166,690 deliveries > > +--------------------------+--------------------------+------------+ > | Average delivery time | Max delivery time | For... | > +--------------------------+--------------------------+------------+ > | 3 sec (00:03) | 8 sec (00:08) | First 50% | > | 5 sec (00:05) | 13 sec (00:13) | First 60% | > | 6 sec (00:06) | 21 sec (00:21) | First 70% | > | 8 sec (00:08) | 26 sec (00:26) | First 80% | > | 11 sec (00:11) | 35 sec (00:35) | First 90% | > | 12 sec (00:12) | 55 sec (00:55) | First 95% | > | 13 sec (00:13) | 72 sec (01:12) | First 96% | > | 14 sec (00:14) | 130 sec (02:10) | First 97% | > | 17 sec (00:17) | 785 sec (13:05) | First 98% | > | 27 sec (00:27) | 1596 sec (26:36) | First 99% | > | 216 sec (03:36) | 334125 sec (3d 20:48:45) | All (100%) | > +--------------------------+--------------------------+------------+ Wow, that's pretty amazing. I manage 13 lists and our biggest one with about 7500 subscribers can take a few hours to process, toss and send. Are the times above after all the processing has taken place? Internal addresses? We have two T1 lines and send out to 7500+ subscribers, around the world (almost every country on the net). There's simply no way we could connect to every system and not use up all our bandwidth. In fact, I think my system is the average (we just bought our system for about $10k). GreatCircle can take an hour or so to send to all the members on it's various lists (majordomo-workers, users, etc). In fact, most of the lists I'm on take around that time. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Brock Rozen | brozen@netvoyage.net | http://www.netvoyage.net/~brozen | ------------------------------------------------------------------------- From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 6 17:38:13 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id RAA12003 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 17:29:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cantec.com ([206.31.250.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id RAA11962 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 17:28:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 17:28:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199608070028.RAA11962@miles.greatcircle.com> Received: from www by cantec.com with SMTP (IPAD 1.1e) id 4476700 ; Tue, 06 Aug 96 20:29:04 UTC X-Sender: dbigham@cantec.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Dave Bigham Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 09:06 PM 8/6/96 +0200, you wrote: >On Tue, 6 Aug 1996 19:06:37 +0200 Kjetil Torgrim Homme > said: >>Here is the kind of statistics you can expect with >previous generation equipment: > >Total: 166,690 deliveries > >+--------------------------+--------------------------+------------+ >| Average delivery time | Max delivery time | For... | >+--------------------------+--------------------------+------------+ >| 3 sec (00:03) | 8 sec (00:08) | First 50% | >| 5 sec (00:05) | 13 sec (00:13) | First 60% | >| 6 sec (00:06) | 21 sec (00:21) | First 70% | >| 8 sec (00:08) | 26 sec (00:26) | First 80% | >| 11 sec (00:11) | 35 sec (00:35) | First 90% | >| 12 sec (00:12) | 55 sec (00:55) | First 95% | >| 13 sec (00:13) | 72 sec (01:12) | First 96% | >| 14 sec (00:14) | 130 sec (02:10) | First 97% | >| 17 sec (00:17) | 785 sec (13:05) | First 98% | >| 27 sec (00:27) | 1596 sec (26:36) | First 99% | >| 216 sec (03:36) | 334125 sec (3d 20:48:45) | All (100%) | >+--------------------------+--------------------------+------------+ > >As you can see, half of the messages were delivered in less than 8 >seconds. The average delivery time, setting aside the usual 1% of >addresses for brain-dead mail systems that support a grand total of one >parallel connection or are up 2 hours a day, is 27 seconds. This >turbo-charged super-server is a 133MHz Pentium with 64M and one drive. >This machine also runs a web server from which people can browse the >archives and make searches. There are 123 lists ranging from a handful of >subscribers to 1,400 or so. It's far from being the largest mailing list >site in the world, but it can probably handle the needs of 99.x% of >existing mailing list sites, and it's really not much hardware at all. >It's only a matter of time until most lists run on that kind of system. I >give it a year, perhaps two. > > Eric > Eric, I think it is important to note that the above statistics are individual statistics for all of the 166,000+ messages sent from all of the lists. They are not from one list at one time. So, for example, *each one* of the fastest 50% took 8 seconds to send - each. Thats more that 664,000 message-seconds, if that makes any sense. It's not a case of 80,000+ messages being sent in 8 seconds or less. I'm probably stupid, but that's what I read the first time through it. Dave Bigham From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 6 17:55:11 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id RAA12860 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 17:41:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sleepy.ponyexpress.net.ponyexpress.net (sleepy.ponyexpress.net [206.52.52.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id RAA12786 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 17:40:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from skb.sbcomp.com by sleepy.ponyexpress.net.ponyexpress.net (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id TAA20872; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 19:39:05 -0500 Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960807004054.006ced0c@206.52.52.2> X-Sender: skb@206.52.52.2 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 06 Aug 1996 19:40:54 -0500 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: "Steven K. Buehler" Subject: header problem Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I hope this is the right list to ask this question, if not, I appologize. Anyway, all the messages that are being sent back out by my majordomo is putting the following line in the heading: X-Authentication-Warning: i2bs.com: majordom set sender to owner-test using -f Can anybody tell me what is causing this and what I need to do to correct it? I would sure appreciate the response. Thank You Steve ------------------------------------------- Steven K. Buehler S & B Computers, Inc. St. Joseph, Missouri 64507-1632 Phone 816-232-2918 Fax 816-232-2336 skb@sbcomp.com ------------------------------------------- From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 6 19:13:16 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id TAA19170 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 19:02:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) id TAA19153 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 19:02:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ginger.vnet.net (ginger.vnet.net [166.82.1.69]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id NAA15943 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 13:54:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lys.vnet.net (murr@lys.vnet.net [166.82.1.6]) by ginger.vnet.net (8.6.13/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA19558 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 15:59:07 -0400 Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by lys.vnet.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA00147 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 16:54:13 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: lys.vnet.net: murr owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 16:54:12 -0400 (EDT) From: murr rhame Reply-To: murr rhame To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve 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, 6 Aug 1996, James C. Armstrong wrote: > I set my error-return address to a filter that attempts to perform > some basic administrative functions, such as unsubscribing addresses > that are returned as non-existant... Listproc 6.0c handles some unsubscribing automatically. Unfortunately, I don't know all of the rules it invokes. On occasion, a "live" user gets the boot. There are four filters built into listproc that I know of. Listproc keeps a log of Message-Id: and a checksum of body text for the most recent posts. If it finds a match, the post is rejected and sent to the listowner. It looks at all text for a repeat of the Message-Id: line. Listproc looks for suspicious subject lines containing words like "error". It also filers any post where a command word begins the body of the text. All filtered posts are sent to the listowner. The only problem I've had with this system is an occasional false match on the "body text" checksums. There's a patch for this which uses CRC instead of a checksum... I've been too lazy to track it down. > Since most of my subscribers are UK, could you please explain the > "bounce-forevers"? I don't have an example handy. The last one I saw said something like: Your mail has not been successfully delivered in 567 hours... I thought the standard was to attempt delivery for only four days. - murr - From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 6 19:38:01 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id TAA22749 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 19:34:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tymix.Tymnet.COM (tymix.tymnet.com [131.146.2.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id TAA22742 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 19:34:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by tymix.Tymnet.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA02830; Tue, 6 Aug 96 19:34:15 PDT Received: from tardis by tymix.Tymnet.COM (in.smtpd); 6 Aug 0 19:34:14 PDT Received: by tardis.tymnet.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA07246; Tue, 6 Aug 96 19:34:10 PDT Date: Tue, 6 Aug 96 19:34:10 PDT From: jms@tardis.Tymnet.COM (Joe Smith) Message-Id: <9608070234.AA07246@tardis.tymnet.com> To: jimo@eskimo.com, chip@unicom.com Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > From: Chip Rosenthal > Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve > > http://www.unicom.com/FAQ/reply-to-harmful.html I sent off a personal reply to the page's author before recognizing Chip. The message I sent bears repeating here. The combination of "Reply-To set to the list's address" and "subscribers at Compuserve or WOW.com" is deadly. It will cause a catostrophic failure of the mailing list. To protect the list from meltdown, the list maintainer must adopt the policy of either "No members of Compuserve or wow.com are allowed to subscribe to any list that munges the Reply-To header", or its corollary "Any list that is open to subscribers from Compuserve or wow.com must NOT insert its own address in the Reply-To header". My lists adhere to the latter policy, and do not have problems with Compuserve subscribers. -Joe > you are dead set in your ways (pro or con), I'd urge folks to take > a gander. > > -- > Chip Rosenthal * Unicom Systems Development * > Unix system programming/support * Internet * test/ctrl/comm systems > URL: http://www.unicom.com/ * 48 68 D8 BE 10 C8 6B DE 60 17 00 0B A7 83 99 8E > From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 02:22:48 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id BAA19032 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 01:57:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from stork.cf.ac.uk (stork.cf.ac.uk [131.251.0.209]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id BAA19018 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 01:57:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from thor.cf.ac.uk by stork.cf.ac.uk with SMTP (PP); Wed, 7 Aug 1996 09:55:57 +0100 Received: (from scocc@localhost) by thor.cf.ac.uk (8.7.4/8.6.12) id JAA04608 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 09:56:47 +0100 (BST) From: Chris Cook Message-Id: <199608070856.JAA04608@thor.cf.ac.uk> Subject: Re: Unsubscribing 3rd party from various lists? To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 09:56:46 +0100 (BST) In-Reply-To: from "Bill Campbell" at Aug 6, 96 08:49:02 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Previously Bill Campbell wrote - > > I've had some of our ISP customers ask this same question, and my > thought is to create a dead-user alias for deleted accounts, and > process that alias with a deliver script (or procmail if that suits > you better). This script would look at the headers and send a message > back to the list manager saying that this account is no longer on the > systems in such a manner that the list manager will be sure that it's > really a bad account and not just another mailer glitch where > somebody's screwed up their alias file. Once this message goes out, I > would add the list-manager/email-address into a database so that only > one messages goes out. The script would then just drop the mail into > /dev/null for this and any subsequent messages. > > So far, I haven't had time to do this, (or to ask this list if > somebody's already done something similar :-). > I'm about to implement this. We have a userbase of roughly 20,000 staff and students and hence have a turnover of approximately 6,000 usernames and surname based mailnames a year. We had a case earlier in the year where a new student was registered with a mailname that had recently been "vacated" by a member of staff. When someone mailed the address expecting it to still be the staff member the student, displaying spectacular ill-judgement, responded in lewd terms. Sigh. Subsequently we've decided to keep vacated usernames for a period of a year or so to ensure that recycling doesn't happen too quickly. During that period the user's mail will be forwarded to a certain address where an automatic script will respond that the username no longer exists. It'll also help us to track when a username was removed. The address that these usernames will point to is named after our local crematorium. The fall-out from the student's stupid actions were that the Texan woman he upset was married to someone in the U.S. State Dept. She threatened to forward the idiots name to the Consular Service for permanent exclusion from U.S territories. She put it nicely "not to set his heart on ever seeing the Alamo if I were him". :-) Chris Cook - Postmaster _____________________________________________________________________________ | Chris Cook - Postmaster, UNIX and Athena Administrator | | University of Wales E-mail : CookC@Cardiff.AC.UK | | College of Cardiff, Phone : +44 1222 874875 | | 40-41 Park Place, (Direct) : +44 1222 874219 | | Cardiff, UK Fax : +44 1222 874285 | |___________________________________________________________________________| "I get fed up hearing people talking about the awesome power of Mother Nature. I'd like to see a straight fight between Mother Nature and Father God." From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 05:25:03 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id FAA03987 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 05:09:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from antares.mcs.anl.gov (mcs.anl.gov [140.221.9.6]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id FAA03970 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 05:08:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mcs.anl.gov (obie.mcs.anl.gov [140.221.5.129]) by antares.mcs.anl.gov (8.6.10/8.6.10) with ESMTP id HAA13866 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 07:08:56 -0500 Message-Id: <199608071208.HAA13866@antares.mcs.anl.gov> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Eric's fast machine (was Re: Reply from Compuserve) Date: Wed, 07 Aug 1996 07:08:54 -0500 From: Gene Rackow Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk This maked me smile. Eric has such a fast machine on delivering mail, but it currently refuses incoming connections. I guess it's quicker to do delivery if you wait until you have a perfect setup before even attemping. ;-) --Gene ------- Forwarded Message > > Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 19:41:53 -0500 > From: Mail Delivery Subsystem > Subject: Returned mail: warning: cannot send message for 4 hours > Message-Id: <199608070041.TAA09179@antares.mcs.anl.gov> > To: > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="TAA09179.839378513/antares.mcs.anl.gov" > > This is a MIME-encapsulated message > > - --TAA09179.839378513/antares.mcs.anl.gov > > ********************************************** > ** THIS IS A WARNING MESSAGE ONLY ** > ** YOU DO NOT NEED TO RESEND YOUR MESSAGE ** > ********************************************** > > The original message was received at Tue, 6 Aug 1996 15:24:21 -0500 > from obie.mcs.anl.gov [140.221.5.129] > > ----- The following addresses had delivery problems ----- > (transient failure) > > ----- Transcript of session follows ----- > ... Deferred: Connection timed out during initial connection with vm.se.lsoft.com. > Warning: message still undelivered after 4 hours > Will keep trying until message is 5 days old > > ----- Original message follows ----- > > - --TAA09179.839378513/antares.mcs.anl.gov > Content-Type: message/rfc822 > > Return-Path: rackow@mcs.anl.gov > Received: from mcs.anl.gov (obie.mcs.anl.gov [140.221.5.129]) by antares.mcs.anl.gov (8.6.10/8.6.10) with ESMTP > id PAA05026; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 15:24:21 -0500 > Message-Id: <199608062024.PAA05026@antares.mcs.anl.gov> > To: Eric Thomas > cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM > Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve > In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 06 Aug 1996 21:06:42 +0200." > <199608061936.MAA02397@miles.greatcircle.com> > Date: Tue, 06 Aug 1996 15:24:13 -0500 > From: Gene Rackow > > > ------- End of Forwarded Message From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 05:53:22 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id FAA08156 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 05:39:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from FSM-1.PICA.ARMY.MIL (fsm-1.pica.army.mil [129.139.164.101]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id FAA08008 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 05:39:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 96 8:40:26 EDT From: Info-LabVIEW List Maintainer To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: mail timing out Organization: Electronics Br, PMMDD, US Army ARDEC, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ Message-ID: <9608070840.aa19326@fsm-1.pica.army.mil> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk murr rhame : >On Tue, 6 Aug 1996, James C. Armstrong wrote: >> Since most of my subscribers are UK, could you please explain the >> "bounce-forevers"? > >I don't have an example handy. The last one I saw said something like: > > Your mail has not been successfully delivered in 567 hours... > >I thought the standard was to attempt delivery for only four days. Nope. There is no "standard" that I'm aware of. We queue mail for 7 days here. Some sites send warnings if the message isn't delivered in an hour (actually, I think I've gotten warnings for messages that weren't delivered in a minute, but that could be what's left of my memory playing tricks on me). Tom Coradeschi, Info-LabVIEW List Maintainer http://k-whiner.pica.army.mil/info-labview/info-labview.html From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 05:56:05 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id FAA08329 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 05:42:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (searn.sunet.se [192.36.125.4]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id FAA08322 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 05:42:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199608071242.FAA08322@miles.greatcircle.com> Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE by SEARN.SUNET.SE (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with BSMTP id 5509; Wed, 07 Aug 96 14:39:16 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin ERIC@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2b/1.8b) with RFC822 id 1727; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 14:39:16 +0200 Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 14:24:26 +0200 From: Eric Thomas Subject: Re: Eric's fast machine (was Re: Reply from Compuserve) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Message of Wed, 07 Aug 1996 07:08:54 -0500 from list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Wed, 07 Aug 1996 07:08:54 -0500 Gene Rackow said: >This maked me smile. Eric has such a fast machine on delivering mail, >but it currently refuses incoming connections. I guess it's quicker to >do delivery if you wait until you have a perfect setup before even >attemping. ;-) 1. It's not the same machine. VM.SE.LSOFT.COM would crap out before it reached even 40,000 daily deliveries, and I don't want to think of the turnaround times. It's exactly the kind of machine from which people are migrating to the kind of PC I mentioned. 2. It was refusing connections because it was down. Internet hosts have a tendency to do that. 3. The machine I mentioned has been in production since December 1995 and has accumulated 0 min and 0 sec of unscheduled downtime since then. Which is not to say that it can't fail, or that there aren't more reliable machines that one can buy. In fact, it's an entry-level server with parity but no ECC, metal cabinet and two fans, no RAID. The construction is serious and robust, but it's not a redundant machine. On the other hand, you can get a redundant PC for around $15k that will be more robust than a typical mid-range workstation. Now could we get this discussion back to a reasonably intelligent level? Eric From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 08:08:01 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id IAA17462 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 08:05:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pcusa01.ecunet.org (pcusa01.ecunet.org [206.115.64.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id IAA17448 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 08:05:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve To: Joe Smith Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 10:33:07 -0400 (EDT) From: Merrill Cook Cc: jimo@eskimo.com, chip@unicom.com, list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: <9608070234.AA07246@tardis.tymnet.com> from "Joe Smith" at Aug 6, 96 07:34:10 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <9608071033.aa06827@pcusa01.ecunet.org> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >From Joe Smith: > > I sent off a personal reply to the page's author before recognizing Chip. > The message I sent bears repeating here. > > The combination of "Reply-To set to the list's address" and "subscribers > at Compuserve or WOW.com" is deadly. It will cause a catostrophic > failure of the mailing list. That's absolutely true -- unless you filter the mail for that stuff before it goes to the list! -- Regards, Merrill Cook Louisville KY mcook@pcusa.org http://www.pcusa.org/pcusa.html -+- From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 08:37:58 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id IAA18568 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 08:22:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (searn.sunet.se [192.36.125.4]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id IAA18560 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 08:22:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199608071522.IAA18560@miles.greatcircle.com> Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE by SEARN.SUNET.SE (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with BSMTP id 6623; Wed, 07 Aug 96 17:19:24 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin ERIC@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2b/1.8b) with RFC822 id 4075; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 17:19:24 +0200 Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 15:40:07 +0200 From: Eric Thomas Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Message of Tue, 06 Aug 1996 15:24:13 -0500 from list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Tue, 06 Aug 1996 15:24:13 -0500 Gene Rackow said: >The biggest cost in the system is not the machine, but the size of the >pipe you have to the outside world. Actually, the biggest cost is manpower (which goes down with a newer, faster machine that has less problems requiring attention). As far as bandwidth goes, I was assuming T1 connectivity or equivalent, which most organizations have nowadays, at least in well connected countries. On a T1 you can deliver over 2 million daily messages with a typical distribution, obviously if you have a big web server or 10,000 telnet users you would need more bandwidth. And I'm not going to dispute that if you're connected at 9600, these figures aren't realistic. I was talking about the typical mid to large corporate site, or the typical university. >You have missed a major consideration in your posting of the chart. That >being what the distribution of your mail looks like. If all of the >machines you are connecting to are also well connected, then the speeds >and feeds are going to be reasonable. (...) If it's really just an >internal company exploder, or mostly well connected edu and com sites >than things are fast. If on the other hand your mailing list is made up >of a couple thousand addresses covering about 100 top level domains and >1500 second level domains, then things are going to run alot slower than >you proclaim. Yes, disbelief is a very common reaction. Years of sendmail servitude tend to have that effect :-) Yesterday this machine made 178,492 deliveries to a total of 3,432 hostnames, 2,309 second-level domains and 79 top-level domains. Excuse me, but I don't sell used cars. The figures I posted are not a specially constructed example to lure people, they are what people can actually expect. The last thing I would want is a horde of customers complaining on public lists that they bought something I recommended and only got 10% of the performance I told them they would get. You just can't fool people and stay in business long if you sell Internet solutions. Customers with similar configurations have similar numbers to show. >Chances are you also have your time limit set to the last entry in your >table. The mail didn't really go though, but bounced. There are many >machines that go down for 3 or 4 days at a shot. I don't have a time limit. These numbers are based on the accounting file produced by the MTA. So, every day a number of messages are delivered, most were submitted the same day, some were not. This is an ongoing process where today my numbers are being negatively affected by slow hosts that were down yesterday and the day before yesterday, and the sites that are down today will affect tomorrow's results. This reflects the simple fact that I won't know the delivery time until I have managed to deliver the message. One does normally ignore the worst 1% of delivery times as they are due to hosts that have non-working connectivity or that are only up during business hours. Their figures simply do not reflect the speed of your delivery system, but the reliability of the target systems. And I'm not disputing that people in countries where the central Internet hub connects at 9.6k will get lousy performance. All I'm saying is that 99% of subscribers can get near-instant turnaround time with hardware that you can probably get for some $3k nowadays. Eric From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 09:22:45 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id JAA21994 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 09:09:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (searn.sunet.se [192.36.125.4]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id JAA21969 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 09:09:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199608071609.JAA21969@miles.greatcircle.com> Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE by SEARN.SUNET.SE (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with BSMTP id 6993; Wed, 07 Aug 96 18:06:26 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin ERIC@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2b/1.8b) with RFC822 id 4871; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 18:06:26 +0200 Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 17:39:32 +0200 From: Eric Thomas Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Message of Tue, 6 Aug 1996 17:28:34 -0700 (PDT) from list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Tue, 6 Aug 1996 17:28:34 -0700 (PDT) Dave Bigham said: >I think it is important to note that the above statistics are individual >statistics for all of the 166,000+ messages sent from all of the lists. >They are not from one list at one time. So, for example, *each one* of >the fastest 50% took 8 seconds to send - each. If you write down all the 166,000 individual delivery times from fastest to slowest, the median will be 8 seconds. That is, 50% of these deliveries will have taken 8 seconds or less, and 50% will have taken 8 seconds or more. >Thats more that 664,000 message-seconds, if that makes any sense. It's >not a case of 80,000+ messages being sent in 8 seconds or less. You're right, but what the users see and care about is the time it takes them to get their copy of a message posted to the list, ie the 8 seconds or whatever, as opposed to the 664,000. I moderate one of the lists on the server in question (I'm in Sweden, the server is in the US), and it usually takes 5-10 seconds between the time I press the SEND key on my approval request and the time my copy of the posting is in my mailbox. I get this copy because I'm subscribed to the list and the message isn't from me, it isn't something that is sent separately before the mailing is processed. The list has about 400 recipients, and the server delivers 500 messages in parallel, so most of the time my host is contacted immediately and it takes a few seconds to deliver the message, hence the result. For a much larger list I might have to wait behind 2-3 other people which would receive service before me. In general, with very large workloads the median increases to 30 sec or so while the 99% average is not significantly affected (normally still under 2 minutes). While 30 sec is not quite as impressive, it makes no difference to the average user who spends over a minute reading each message. Eric From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 09:52:54 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id JAA24949 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 09:33:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from onenw.org (dialnet1-64.cortland.com [204.137.164.64]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id JAA24942 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 09:33:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from DEAN ([204.137.132.136]) by onenw.org (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id IAA20020 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 08:34:41 -0700 Received: by DEAN with Microsoft Mail id <01BB8443.AB15F9C0@DEAN>; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 09:34:45 -0700 Message-ID: <01BB8443.AB15F9C0@DEAN> From: Dean Ericksen To: "'Greatcircle Listowners'" Subject: Disabling "who" completely in Majordomo Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 09:34:43 -0700 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk 08/07/96 9:32 AM We're hosting a list that has requested that *nobody* have the ability to obtain the list's distribution names. It's already restricted such that only list members can run "who", but I don't see the configuration option to completely disable this feature. Ideas appreciated; thanks. -Dean ===== mailto:dean@onenw.org ===== ONE/Northwest ===== http://www.onenw.org From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 09:56:02 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id JAA25540 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 09:37:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from digital.netvoyage.net (digital.netvoyage.net [205.162.154.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id JAA25306 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 09:36:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (brozen@localhost) by digital.netvoyage.net (8.6.13/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA15673; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 09:36:40 -0700 Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 09:36:40 -0700 (PDT) From: Brock Rozen Reply-To: Brock Rozen To: Eric Thomas cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve In-Reply-To: <199608071609.JAA21969@miles.greatcircle.com> Message-ID: X-URL: http://www.netvoyage.net/~brozen MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Wed, 7 Aug 1996, Eric Thomas wrote: > You're right, but what the users see and care about is the time it takes > them to get their copy of a message posted to the list, ie the 8 seconds > or whatever, as opposed to the 664,000. I moderate one of the lists on > the server in question (I'm in Sweden, the server is in the US), and it > usually takes 5-10 seconds between the time I press the SEND key on my > approval request and the time my copy of the posting is in my mailbox. I > get this copy because I'm subscribed to the list and the message isn't > from me, it isn't something that is sent separately before the mailing is > processed. The list has about 400 recipients, and the server delivers 500 Your list is relatively small. I have a list with over 7500 subscribers and delivery time can be hours. Depending on your particular setup, your host might process the mail before sending it. Thus, it could take my system hours to process all of those subscribers THEN send it. I'm not sure exactly how it does it -- will have to check. Regardless, since I'm relatively in the middle of my OWN subscription lists, it can take me hours to receive my own messages. Those on the end of the list probably receive it close to a day later...and I send things that need to be delivered on a timely basis. I know part of the delay is in the software and how majordomo currently processes messages. One person whom I collaborate with has created software that GREATLY increases the delivery times -- so software itself is a major bottleneck. Bandwidth would be also, at least with 7500 subscribers. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Brock Rozen | brozen@netvoyage.net | http://www.netvoyage.net/~brozen | ------------------------------------------------------------------------- From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 10:09:31 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id KAA29512 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 10:04:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (searn.sunet.se [192.36.125.4]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id KAA29505 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 10:04:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199608071704.KAA29505@miles.greatcircle.com> Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE by SEARN.SUNET.SE (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with BSMTP id 7242; Wed, 07 Aug 96 19:01:10 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin ERIC@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2b/1.8b) with RFC822 id 5419; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 19:01:11 +0200 Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 18:52:52 +0200 From: Eric Thomas Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Message of Wed, 7 Aug 1996 09:36:40 -0700 (PDT) from Brock Rozen Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Wed, 7 Aug 1996 09:36:40 -0700 (PDT) Brock Rozen said: >Your list is relatively small. I have a list with over 7500 subscribers >and delivery time can be hours. 7,500 subscribers ought to take 2-10 minutes depending on hardware and connectivity, minus the inevitable 1-2% of subscribers with non-working mail hosts. If you want I can arrange for a demonstration. Do you have a spare PC? >Depending on your particular setup, your host might process the mail >before sending it. Yes but for 7,500 subscribers it would only take a few seconds on a P133. Eric From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 10:23:03 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id KAA00229 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 10:09:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id KAA00211 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 10:08:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (tibbs@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id MAA24526; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 12:08:32 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199608071708.MAA24526@sina.hpc.uh.edu> To: dean@onenw.org Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Disabling "who" completely in Majordomo In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 7 Aug 1996 09:34:43 -0700" References: <01BB8443.AB15F9C0@DEAN> X-Mailer: Mew beta version 0.98 on Emacs 19.30.1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 07 Aug 1996 12:08:32 -0500 From: Jason L Tibbitts III Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >>>>> "DE" == Dean Ericksen writes: DE> We're hosting a list that has requested that *nobody* have the ability DE> to obtain the list's distribution names. What version? For 1.93, get the anon-who patch from the majordomo-users archive. For 1.94 (still in development) set who_access = closed. For majordomo questions, the list majordomo-users@greatcircle.com is probably a better place to send Majordomo-specific questions. -- Jason L. Tibbitts III - tibbs@uh.edu - 713/743-8684 - 221SR1 System Manager: University of Houston High Performance Computing Center 1994 PC800 "Kuroneko" DoD# 1723 From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 10:33:37 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id KAA01328 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 10:19:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spinoza.terena.nl (spinoza.terena.nl [192.87.30.5]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id KAA01318 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 10:19:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [130.209.33.78] (dial-in-spec-05.cent.gla.ac.uk [130.209.33.78]) by spinoza.terena.nl (8.6.13/8.6.12) with ESMTP id TAA25816; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 19:19:01 +0200 X-Sender: martin@popper.terena.nl Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <199608071609.JAA21969@miles.greatcircle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 18:19:19 +0100 To: Brock Rozen , Eric Thomas From: John Martin Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 5:36 pm +0100 07/08/96, Brock Rozen wrote: >I know part of the delay is in the software and how majordomo currently >processes messages. One person whom I collaborate with has created >software that GREATLY increases the delivery times -- so software itself >is a major bottleneck. Bandwidth would be also, at least with 7500 >subscribers. There are many things you could do to speed this up. First of all, use something a little faster than Majordomo to distribute your messages. I have not looked at it for over a year but there is, as I recall, no reason why you need to use the mail distribution program part of Majordomo just because you use the command processor part. I use an edited version of the popular 'distribute', (not to be confused with Eric's "DISTRIBUTE", of course ;->), which can be found using archie, and it is quite fast. (But I should point out that I dont currently run Majordomo either.) You might also like to consider breaking your list up into multiple lists and letting them get processed in parallel. This way at least the same persons are not always getting their mail last. :-) Running a caching-only DNS server would also help, I believe... Regards, John From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 10:53:08 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id KAA03305 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 10:38:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from idyllmtn.com (ayla.idyllmtn.com [206.16.238.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id KAA03291 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 10:38:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gates.idyllmtn.com by idyllmtn.com (8.6.8/Idyllmtn) id KAA27477; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 10:36:07 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19960807174958.006f788c@206.16.238.1> X-Sender: kynn@206.16.238.1 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 07 Aug 1996 10:49:58 -0700 To: Dean Ericksen From: Kynn Bartlett Subject: Re: Disabling "who" completely in Majordomo Cc: "'Greatcircle Listowners'" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 09:34 AM 8/7/96 -0700, Dean Ericksen wrote: >We're hosting a list that has requested that *nobody* have the ability to >obtain the list's distribution names. It's already restricted such that >only list members can run "who", but I don't see the configuration option >to completely disable this feature. Ideas appreciated; thanks. I couldn't find it either, so I just tweaked the 'majordomo' script and removed 'who' altogether. I couldn't see a reason to allow it, given that too many people are quick to steal email addresses for spamlists. I just did something like this: (renamed the original do_who to do_who_old) [...] sub do_who { print REPLY "**** The 'who' command has been disabled.\n"; return 0; } [...] The only person who might need to access the list's 'who' command is the list owner, so I set up a web page for that -- see http://www.idyllmtn.com/lists/ (not that any of you know the passwords, but hey). -- /\ /\ /\ /\ Kynn Bartlett / kynn@idyllmtn.com / \ / \/ \ / \ Idyll Mountain Internet / \ //\ /\ \ / \ '_| _` // \/ \__\ '_| _` Virtual Dog Show 3 opens on September 6th! From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 14:40:39 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id OAA02652 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 14:23:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) id OAA02510 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 14:23:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (searn.sunet.se [192.36.125.4]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id GAA11807 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 06:42:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199608071342.GAA11807@miles.greatcircle.com> Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE by SEARN.SUNET.SE (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with BSMTP id 5888; Wed, 07 Aug 96 15:38:58 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin ERIC@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2b/1.8b) with RFC822 id 2528; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 15:38:58 +0200 Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 15:29:12 +0200 From: Eric Thomas Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Message of Tue, 6 Aug 1996 22:35:00 +0200 from list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Tue, 6 Aug 1996 22:35:00 +0200 Kjetil Torgrim Homme said: >It still makes sense when one of the correspondents are on the digest. Well, that's your opinion. Personally, when I subscribe to a digest, I only want to get mail from that list once a day. I don't want to get every single reply to my post, which as you know after 2-3 days means people are talking about something completely different and STILL sending me a copy because they're too lazy or too incompetent or don't care. The IETF list is an excellent example, every time I post something it takes about 2 weeks before I stop getting private replies about something totally different. >A good portion of the mailing lists out there are based on Sendmail >aliases, and I don't think that will change much. Speaking as a >postmaster, I don't care if the lists I host take an hour until they >reach the last recipient, and I won't install special software to fix >it. That's your prerogative. However, I can guarantee that users will think otherwise. There are already a number of sites where the postmaster generally agrees with you, but the users felt otherwise, and they bought their own machine (I mean with a grant or their department's money - it is now cheap enough to be within their reach). And in some cases the postmaster changed his mind very quickly and did exactly the same a few months later, after the other departments threatened to do the same instead of paying the computer department for mail services. Eric From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 15:09:50 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id OAA05754 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 14:56:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ginger.vnet.net (ginger.vnet.net [166.82.1.69]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id OAA05745 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 14:55:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jazzmin.vnet.net (murr@jazzmin.vnet.net [166.82.1.4]) by ginger.vnet.net (8.6.13/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA12212 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 16:59:41 -0400 Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by jazzmin.vnet.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA10697 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 17:55:58 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: jazzmin.vnet.net: murr owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 17:55:57 -0400 (EDT) From: murr rhame Reply-To: murr rhame To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: mail timing out In-Reply-To: <9608070840.aa19326@fsm-1.pica.army.mil> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Wed, 7 Aug 1996, Info-LabVIEW List Maintainer wrote: > Nope. There is no "standard" that I'm aware of. We queue mail for 7 days > here. Some sites send warnings if the message isn't delivered in an hour > (actually, I think I've gotten warnings for messages that weren't > delivered in a minute, but that could be what's left of my memory > playing tricks on me). How about a 32 day timeout? This UUCP example seems a bit extreme: >After 72 hours, your message has not yet been fully delivered. >The potential for successful delivery exists for a further 29 days. >No further action is required by you. >Delays are usually due to service interruptions at the receiving >machine; possibly the recipient is on holiday, cancelling the account >shortly, or simply choosing not to collect their email. >Please do NOT reply to this automatic message. I did not realize they were so determined to deliver the mail in the UK. :-) - murr - From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 19:23:07 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id TAA02230 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 19:15:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay.mod.uk (relay.mod.uk [192.5.29.50]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id TAA02174 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 19:15:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.dra.hmg.gb by relay.mod.uk with local SMTP id ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 09:03:38 +0100 Received: from wandle.dra.hmg.gb by hermes.dra.hmg.gb (MX V4.1 VAX) with SMTP; Wed, 07 Aug 1996 09:03:24 GMT Received: from rivers.dra.hmg.gb by wandle.dra.hmg.gb with smtp(Smail3.1.28.1 #64) id m0uo3a3-0007UqC; Wed, 7 Aug 96 09:03 WET DST X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.5 12/11/95 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve Organization: IT Vulnerabilities Group, DRA Malvern, UK References: <199608061706.9039.mne.ifi.uio.no@ifi.uio.no> In-reply-to: <199608061706.9039.mne.ifi.uio.no@ifi.uio.no> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 07 Aug 1996 09:03:02 +0100 Message-ID: <21939.839404982@rivers.dra.hmg.gb> From: Christopher Samuel Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message <199608061706.9039.mne.ifi.uio.no@ifi.uio.no>, Kjetil Torgrim Homme writes: > [James C. Armstrong] > > | if that is even an option in their mailer. > > Well, then they shouldn't be using that program. There's no reason to > use bad software, especially as there are good, free programs > available. Unfortunately there are sites out there that do mandate user agents, or have setups with proprietary mail systems where there is only one user agent available. This seems to happen a fair bit in educational establishments for some reason. :-( Several times now I've said to people "get a better mailer" and they've said "no can do" back. Sigh. Chris -- Christopher Samuel, IT Vulnerabilities Group, chris@rivers.dra.hmg.gb N-115, Defence Research Agency, St Andrews Road, Great Malvern, England, UK DISCLAIMER: I write only for myself, not for DRA. Phone: +44 1684 894644 +MIME+ +PGP+ From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 20:38:39 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id UAA07143 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 20:26:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sacmgr.mp.usbr.gov (sacmgr.mp.usbr.gov [140.214.12.4]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id UAA07136 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 20:26:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by sacto.mp.usbr.gov (MX V4.2 VAX) id 40; Wed, 07 Aug 1996 20:26:23 PDT Date: Wed, 07 Aug 1996 20:26:20 PDT From: "Henry W. Miller" To: list-managers@greatcircle.com CC: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009A6827.28C86D22.40@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: AOL offline Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk For those of you who have seen your mail queues back up, AOL is offline. Channel 5 in San Francisco has a Web page with the story: http://www.kpix.com/news The claims about mail being held somewhere is only partially true - it gets held on the sender's machine. All of their mail gateways seem to be down... -HWM From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 21:23:03 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id VAA09742 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 21:17:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wildride.schoneal.com (wildride.schoneal.com [206.81.38.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id VAA09735 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 21:17:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from meo@localhost) by wildride.schoneal.com (8.6.11/8.6.11) id XAA02286; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 23:19:48 -0500 Message-Id: <199608080419.XAA02286@wildride.schoneal.com> Subject: Re: AOL offline To: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov (Henry W. Miller) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 23:19:48 -0500 (CDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov In-Reply-To: <009A6827.28C86D22.40@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> from "Henry W. Miller" at Aug 7, 96 08:26:20 pm From: meo@schoneal.com (Miles O'Neal) Reply-To: meo@schoneal.com (Miles O'Neal) Organization: Schober O'Neal, Inc / Net Ads X-WWW-URL: http://www.schoneal.com/~meo/ X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Henry W. Miller said... | For those of you who have seen your mail queues back up, AOL is |offline. ... | The claims about mail being held somewhere is only partially |true - it gets held on the sender's machine. All of their mail gateways |seem to be down... That would explain the huge number of sendmails waiting to time out on my server, all related to mx.aol.com . Has anyone heard from our aol members? It would be nice to know when they *really* expect to be back up. -Miles From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 21:38:00 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id VAA10580 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 21:34:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sacmgr.mp.usbr.gov (sacmgr.mp.usbr.gov [140.214.12.4]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id VAA10553 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 21:33:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by sacto.mp.usbr.gov (MX V4.2 VAX) id 58; Wed, 07 Aug 1996 21:33:34 PDT Date: Wed, 07 Aug 1996 21:32:56 PDT From: "Henry W. Miller" To: meo@schoneal.com CC: list-managers@greatcircle.com, henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009A6830.76BF3674.58@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: Re: AOL offline Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > From: MX%"meo@schoneal.com" 7-AUG-1996 21:17:50.67 > Subj: Re: AOL offline Miles, > Henry W. Miller said... > > | For those of you who have seen your mail queues back up, AOL is > |offline. > ... > | The claims about mail being held somewhere is only partially > |true - it gets held on the sender's machine. All of their mail gateways > |seem to be down... > > That would explain the huge number of sendmails waiting > to time out on my server, all related to mx.aol.com . > Has anyone heard from our aol members? It would be nice > to know when they *really* expect to be back up. > > -Miles Probably because they can't get online to send mail... -HWM From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 22:23:06 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id WAA12820 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 22:17:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wildride.schoneal.com (wildride.schoneal.com [206.81.38.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id WAA12801 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 22:17:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from meo@localhost) by wildride.schoneal.com (8.6.11/8.6.11) id AAA02566; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 00:20:28 -0500 Message-Id: <199608080520.AAA02566@wildride.schoneal.com> Subject: Re: AOL offline To: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov (Henry W. Miller) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 00:20:28 -0500 (CDT) Cc: meo@schoneal.com, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov In-Reply-To: <009A6830.76BF3674.58@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> from "Henry W. Miller" at Aug 7, 96 09:32:56 pm From: meo@schoneal.com (Miles O'Neal) Reply-To: meo@schoneal.com (Miles O'Neal) Organization: Schober O'Neal, Inc / Net Ads X-WWW-URL: http://www.schoneal.com/~meo/ X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Henry W. Miller said... | | Probably because [AOL] can't get online to send mail... They could use a non-aol account or call someone. Surely they haven't alienated *everyone* who could help them. 8^) -Miles From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 22:25:34 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id WAA12622 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 22:15:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.his.com (mail.his.com [205.177.25.9]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id WAA12576 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 22:15:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.177.25.174] (brad.his.com [205.177.25.174]) by mail.his.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id BAA07654; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 01:15:06 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199608052252.PAA26909@eskimo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 00:00:32 -0400 To: Jim Osborn , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: AOL lost its MIME? Cc: BKnowles@aol.net Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 6:52 PM -0400 8/5/96, Jim Osborn wrote: >Is anyone familiar enough with AOL to know what I should advise my >poor AOL subscribers to do, other than "contact AOL tech support?" >Does anyone know who I should contact at AOL to ask this same >question? Work with me on this issue via my work address (above). -- Brad Knowles, MIME/PGP: brad@his.com comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer finger brad@his.com for my PGP Public Keys and Geek Code The comp.mail.sendmail FAQ is at From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 22:28:10 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id WAA12655 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 22:15:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.his.com (mail.his.com [205.177.25.9]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id WAA12631 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 22:15:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.177.25.174] (brad.his.com [205.177.25.174]) by mail.his.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id BAA07670; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 01:15:25 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <01BB8443.AB15F9C0@DEAN> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 00:19:23 -0400 To: Dean Ericksen , "'Greatcircle Listowners'" From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: Disabling "who" completely in Majordomo Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 12:34 PM -0400 8/7/96, Dean Ericksen wrote: >We're hosting a list that has requested that *nobody* have the ability to >obtain the list's distribution names. It's already restricted such that >only list members can run "who", but I don't see the configuration option >to completely disable this feature. Ideas appreciated; thanks. This list is dedicated to the discussion of mailing lists in general. Your Majordomo-specific question should be directed to the Majordomo mailing list. -- Brad Knowles, MIME/PGP: brad@his.com comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer finger brad@his.com for my PGP Public Keys and Geek Code The comp.mail.sendmail FAQ is at From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 22:30:57 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id WAA12645 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 22:15:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.his.com (mail.his.com [205.177.25.9]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id WAA12596 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 22:15:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.177.25.174] (brad.his.com [205.177.25.174]) by mail.his.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id BAA07663; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 01:15:16 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960807004054.006ced0c@206.52.52.2> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 00:12:31 -0400 To: "Steven K. Buehler" , list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: header problem Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 8:40 PM -0400 8/6/96, Steven K. Buehler wrote: >I hope this is the right list to ask this question, if not, I appologize. >Anyway, all the messages that are being sent back out by my majordomo is >putting the following line in the heading: > >X-Authentication-Warning: i2bs.com: majordom set sender to owner-test using -f > >Can anybody tell me what is causing this and what I need to do to correct >it? I would sure appreciate the response. This is one place, but you're better off looking in the books that document the SMTP MTA your machine uses to process Internet mail. In this case, it's almost certainly a program known as "sendmail", and there are two books on the subject: _sendmail_ by Bryan Costales, and _Sendmail: Theory and Practice_ by Avolio & Vixie. -- Brad Knowles, MIME/PGP: brad@his.com comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer finger brad@his.com for my PGP Public Keys and Geek Code The comp.mail.sendmail FAQ is at From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 22:33:34 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id WAA12654 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 22:15:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.his.com (mail.his.com [205.177.25.9]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id WAA12604 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 22:15:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.177.25.174] (brad.his.com [205.177.25.174]) by mail.his.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id BAA07667; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 01:15:20 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <9608070840.aa19326@fsm-1.pica.army.mil> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 00:16:17 -0400 To: Info-LabVIEW List Maintainer , list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: mail timing out Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 8:40 AM -0400 8/7/96, Info-LabVIEW List Maintainer wrote: >Nope. There is no "standard" that I'm aware of. We queue mail for 7 days >here. Some sites send warnings if the message isn't delivered in an hour >(actually, I think I've gotten warnings for messages that weren't delivered >in a minute, but that could be what's left of my memory playing tricks on >me). I've heard some rules-of-thumb. You should hold it for at the *very* minimum of three days, preferably five days, and you're welcome to hold it as long as seven days. The sendmail default is to send a warning after four hours, but future versions may default to varying that based on the message priority and/or precedence (the ability is there today in sendmail 8.7.5, but the default configuration doesn't make use of that). -- Brad Knowles, MIME/PGP: brad@his.com comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer finger brad@his.com for my PGP Public Keys and Geek Code The comp.mail.sendmail FAQ is at From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 22:36:10 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id WAA12774 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 22:17:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.his.com (mail.his.com [205.177.25.9]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id WAA12729 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 22:17:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.177.25.174] (brad.his.com [205.177.25.174]) by mail.his.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id BAA07683; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 01:15:35 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <199608071609.JAA21969@miles.greatcircle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 00:26:25 -0400 To: John Martin , Brock Rozen , Eric Thomas From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 1:19 PM -0400 8/7/96, John Martin wrote: >Running a caching-only DNS server would also help, I believe... It's been my experience that systems that handle *huge* amounts of mail per day, running a local caching-only nameserver ends up with BIND fighting for many of the same resources as the SMTP MTA, with the loser being everyone. A caching-only nameserver that runs on a dedicated machine doesn't take much horsepower, and so long as it can be crammed with 128MB RAM or more (the current cache quickly builds up to 48-64MB and then stabilizes), even something as small as a SunSPARCstation IPC or IPX should be sufficient. Even better, this machine can be used by multiple other machines, and you end up not duplicating that effort across all those other servers (which could presumably put those resources to better use running whatever server software that is their primary purpose in life). -- Brad Knowles, MIME/PGP: brad@his.com comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer finger brad@his.com for my PGP Public Keys and Geek Code The comp.mail.sendmail FAQ is at From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 22:38:25 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id WAA13463 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 22:25:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.his.com (mail.his.com [205.177.25.9]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id WAA13445 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 22:25:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.177.25.174] (brad.his.com [205.177.25.174]) by mail.his.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id BAA08182; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 01:25:25 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199608080419.XAA02286@wildride.schoneal.com> References: <009A6827.28C86D22.40@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> from "Henry W. Miller" at Aug 7, 96 08:26:20 pm Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 01:25:09 -0400 To: meo@schoneal.com (Miles O'Neal), henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov (Henry W. Miller) From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: AOL offline Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 12:19 AM -0400 8/8/96, Miles O'Neal wrote: >That would explain the huge number of sendmails waiting >to time out on my server, all related to mx.aol.com . >Has anyone heard from our aol members? It would be nice >to know when they *really* expect to be back up. As the day progressed, the time when we were supposed to be back up kept getting pushed back further and further. When I left at 9:30 PM EDT 7 Aug 1996, we'd started accepting mail at the gateways, and had dropped in a new utility to help us manage the million-plus messages that had been queued for us during the preceding seventeen hours, so that we'd get the best possible sustainable flow across the gateways. -- Brad Knowles, MIME/PGP: brad@his.com comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer finger brad@his.com for my PGP Public Keys and Geek Code The comp.mail.sendmail FAQ is at From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 22:39:42 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id WAA12715 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 22:17:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.his.com (mail.his.com [205.177.25.9]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id WAA12700 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 22:16:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.177.25.174] (brad.his.com [205.177.25.174]) by mail.his.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id BAA07678; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 01:15:30 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <199608071609.JAA21969@miles.greatcircle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 00:22:18 -0400 To: Brock Rozen , Eric Thomas From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 12:36 PM -0400 8/7/96, Brock Rozen wrote: >Your list is relatively small. I have a list with over 7500 subscribers >and delivery time can be hours. This is partly due to your mailing list management software (and whether it's intelligent regarding how it breaks messages into multiple envelopes and sends each envelope separately), and partly a function of the SMTP MTA you use. >I know part of the delay is in the software and how majordomo currently >processes messages. One person whom I collaborate with has created >software that GREATLY increases the delivery times -- so software itself >is a major bottleneck. Bandwidth would be also, at least with 7500 >subscribers. If this software is the part that breaks each outgoing message into multiple parts (no more than fifty recipients per envelope, or whatever the number is), then this is *very* important software for your setup. I recommend you get it and install it immediately, as Majordomo runs much better with it than without it. -- Brad Knowles, MIME/PGP: brad@his.com comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer finger brad@his.com for my PGP Public Keys and Geek Code The comp.mail.sendmail FAQ is at From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 22:44:29 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id WAA12658 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 22:16:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.his.com (mail.his.com [205.177.25.9]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id WAA12644 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 22:15:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.177.25.174] (brad.his.com [205.177.25.174]) by mail.his.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id BAA07689; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 01:15:40 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199608071342.GAA11807@miles.greatcircle.com> References: Message of Tue, 6 Aug 1996 22:35:00 +0200 from list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 00:30:32 -0400 To: Eric Thomas , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 9:29 AM -0400 8/7/96, Eric Thomas wrote: >That's your prerogative. However, I can guarantee that users will think >otherwise. There are already a number of sites where the postmaster >generally agrees with you, but the users felt otherwise, and they bought >their own machine (I mean with a grant or their department's money - it >is now cheap enough to be within their reach). And in some cases the >postmaster changed his mind very quickly and did exactly the same a few >months later, after the other departments threatened to do the same >instead of paying the computer department for mail services. I submit that running a mailing list is a fairly different function for a machine, and trying to shoe-horn general purpose software like sendmail into doing that job is probably a mistake. You should select software that was expressly written for the task (depending on how much money you have and how many recipients, at one extreme, properly configured Majordomo may be more than enough, and at the other Listserv may not be quite powerful enough), and if it's important enough, then you should go so far as to run this software on dedicated hardware. You can quote me, if you like. -- Brad Knowles, MIME/PGP: brad@his.com comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer finger brad@his.com for my PGP Public Keys and Geek Code The comp.mail.sendmail FAQ is at From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 22:45:39 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id WAA12632 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 22:15:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.his.com (mail.his.com [205.177.25.9]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id WAA12580 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 22:15:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.177.25.174] (brad.his.com [205.177.25.174]) by mail.his.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id BAA07659; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 01:15:10 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199608062035.9089.mne.ifi.uio.no@ifi.uio.no> References: <199608061936.MAA02397@miles.greatcircle.com> (message from Eric Thomas on Tue, 6 Aug 1996 21:06:42 +0200) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 00:08:39 -0400 To: Kjetil Torgrim Homme , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 4:35 PM -0400 8/6/96, Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote: >A good portion of the mailing lists out there are based on Sendmail >aliases, and I don't think that will change much. Speaking as a >postmaster, I don't care if the lists I host take an hour until they >reach the last recipient, and I won't install special software to fix >it. Unless Sendmail sees some serious optimization regarding long >recipient lists, you're too optimistic. There are some improvements comming in version 8.8, and further improvements appear to be coming down the pipe in 8.9 or later versions. One of the explicit things I've been trying to get put into sendmail is some rudimentary intelligence as to when you should break an envelope into multiple parts. Even if this is just a hard-coded number (or an option you can change in the sendmail.cf), this would be an improvement over what we have today. I think we could completely subsume the kind of intelligence built into the envelope-splitting tool for Majordomo, although I doubt it will ever get to the point where sendmail is going to try to seriously compete with Listserv or Listproc for how efficiently and how quickly extremely large numbers of recipients on a single message can be handled. -- Brad Knowles, MIME/PGP: brad@his.com comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer finger brad@his.com for my PGP Public Keys and Geek Code The comp.mail.sendmail FAQ is at From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 22:47:59 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id WAA12577 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 22:15:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.his.com (mail.his.com [205.177.25.9]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id WAA12565 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 22:15:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.177.25.174] (brad.his.com [205.177.25.174]) by mail.his.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id BAA07650; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 01:15:01 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199608051818.OAA01140@sys2.bloodstockwww.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 23:59:15 -0400 To: Bill Antoniadis , list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: Please help! Cc: BKnowles@aol.net Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 2:18 PM -0400 8/5/96, Bill Antoniadis wrote: > I use Majordomo to occasionally send mail to thousands of our >business customers informing them of new products. Our mailing list is >password protected so noone else can send mail to it but I have one major >problem: Our customers that use AOL seem to get other AOL customer's email >addresses attached to the end of our mail. In other words, they can see all >the other AOL email addresses from our list. These addresses are attached >to the "Apparently-To:" header. The program known as "sendmail" adds those "Apparently-To:" headers when there are no valid "To:" or "Cc:" headers. What SMTP MTA do you use with Majordomo? Is it sendmail? Then your machine is adding the "Apparently-To:" header. If not, what about the next machine in the line (e.g., the mail relay at your ISP)? I'm very surprised that any version of Majordomo would be creating any kind of messages that wouldn't at least have a valid "To:" address, with all the real addressees "hidden" in the "Bcc:" field (on your local end, in the SMTP protocol, they're just envelope recipients without being listed in the headers). If this is a real problem for you, then installing sendmail 8.7.5 on your local end will give you the ability to configure what happens when there are no valid "To:" or "Cc:" addressees, and once it fixes things one way, the version of sendmail we run won't un-do that. -- Brad Knowles, MIME/PGP: brad@his.com comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer finger brad@his.com for my PGP Public Keys and Geek Code The comp.mail.sendmail FAQ is at From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 23:23:10 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id XAA20511 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 23:16:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.his.com (mail.his.com [205.177.25.9]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id XAA20486 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 23:15:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.177.25.174] (brad.his.com [205.177.25.174]) by mail.his.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id CAA22078; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 02:14:16 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <009A6827.28C86D22.40@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 01:43:33 -0400 To: "Henry W. Miller" , list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: AOL offline Cc: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov, BKnowles@aol.net Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 11:26 PM -0400 8/7/96, Henry W. Miller wrote: > For those of you who have seen your mail queues back up, AOL is >offline. Channel 5 in San Francisco has a Web page with the story: > >http://www.kpix.com/news Actually, the proper URL for this particular story is . Please let me know if you find any other good online articles on this subject. -- Brad Knowles, MIME/PGP: brad@his.com comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer finger brad@his.com for my PGP Public Keys and Geek Code The comp.mail.sendmail FAQ is at From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 23:37:56 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id XAA21987 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 23:33:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from park.interport.net (park.interport.net [199.184.165.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id XAA21980 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 23:33:10 -0700 (PDT) From: kieran@interport.net Received: from interport.net (kieran@madison.nfs.interport.net [205.161.144.1]) by park.interport.net (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id CAA23605 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 02:33:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from kieran@localhost) by interport.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) id CAA20797 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 02:33:11 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199608080633.CAA20797@interport.net> Subject: Re: AOL offline To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 02:33:11 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I think I just screwed up and sent this message to an individual instead of to the list. Whoever got it, my apologies. Anyway...whatever happened to AOL, it also brought down LISTSERV.AOL.COM as well. I'd always been under the impression that their listserv was wholly separate from the actual online service...is that not true? Or were all AOL.COM mail servers simply shut down as some sort of precaution, including the listserv? --Aaron --owner of three listserv.aol.com lists From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 23:53:01 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id XAA23498 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 23:50:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.his.com (mail.his.com [205.177.25.9]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id XAA23479 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 23:50:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.177.25.174] (brad.his.com [205.177.25.174]) by mail.his.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id CAA08818; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 02:50:46 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199608080633.CAA20797@interport.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 02:50:38 -0400 To: kieran@interport.net, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: AOL offline Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 2:33 AM -0400 8/8/96, kieran@interport.net wrote: >Anyway...whatever happened to AOL, it also brought down LISTSERV.AOL.COM >as well. I'd always been under the impression that their listserv was >wholly separate from the actual online service...is that not true? Or >were all AOL.COM mail servers simply shut down as some sort of >precaution, including the listserv? The whole network was inaccessible from the Internet. This means all MXes for aol.com, as well as the separate listserv.aol.com machines. This also includes gnn.com, since that's hosted at the same site and takes advantage of the same dial-in network. -- Brad Knowles, MIME/PGP: brad@his.com comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer finger brad@his.com for my PGP Public Keys and Geek Code The comp.mail.sendmail FAQ is at From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 7 23:56:19 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id XAA23276 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 23:48:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.his.com (mail.his.com [205.177.25.9]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id XAA23267 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 23:48:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.177.25.174] (brad.his.com [205.177.25.174]) by mail.his.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id CAA08725; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 02:48:40 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <009A6827.28C86D22.40@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 02:48:33 -0400 To: "Henry W. Miller" , list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: AOL offline Cc: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 11:26 PM -0400 8/7/96, Henry W. Miller wrote: > For those of you who have seen your mail queues back up, AOL is >offline. Channel 5 in San Francisco has a Web page with the story: > >http://www.kpix.com/news See also: Please let me know what other (if any) references to this subject you find online. Preferably at a site that does *not* require user registration (i.e., *not* the New York Times Online or Wall Street Journal Online). You can say a lot of bad things about Steve Case, but at least he's got one thing right -- people really do just want to be able to access the full system with one low monthly fee. This ala carte' BS is for the birds. -- Brad Knowles, MIME/PGP: brad@his.com comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer finger brad@his.com for my PGP Public Keys and Geek Code The comp.mail.sendmail FAQ is at From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 8 04:22:54 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id EAA12228 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 04:22:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from com2.uclan.ac.uk (com2.uclan.ac.uk [193.61.255.4]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id EAA12210 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 04:22:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gw.uclan.ac.uk by com2.uclan.ac.uk with SMTP (PP); Thu, 8 Aug 1996 12:23:02 +0100 Received: from MAS1/MAILQ by mail-gw.uclan.ac.uk (Mercury 1.21); 8 Aug 96 12:24:23 GMT+0 Received: from MAILQ by MAS1 (Mercury 1.21); 8 Aug 96 12:24:20 GMT+0 From: Pamela Organization: University of Central Lancashire To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 12:22:46 GMT+0 Subject: PP and LISTSERV X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.01) Message-ID: Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I'm in the process of tring to install the evaluation copy of LISTSERV. I've hit a snag in that, the LISTSERV installation instructions are great for those using Sendmail as their MTA, but we're using PP. I've compiled the programs with the relevant PP options, but have got stuck at the point where you have to tell your mail system about LISTSERV. The instructions only cover how to set up aliases for Sendmail and LSOFT don't seem to know how to do it either. Is there anyone who has LISTERV running with PP, is so any help would be much appreciated. Thanks Pam ********************************* Pamela Robinson Information Systems and Network Services University of Central Lancashire Preston PR1 2HE ********************************* From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 8 06:38:08 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id GAA18064 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 06:36:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from library.ummed.edu (library.ummed.edu [146.189.64.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id GAA18036 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 06:35:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by library.ummed.edu id JAA08862; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 09:35:56 -0400 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: PP and LISTSERV References: From: Norm Aleks In-Reply-To: Pamela's message of Thu, 8 Aug 1996 12:22:46 GMT+0 Lines: 20 X-Mailer: Red Gnus v0.6/Emacs 19.30 Date: 08 Aug 1996 08:50:01 -0400 Message-ID: Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Pamela writes: > Is there anyone who has LISTERV running with PP, is so any help would be > much appreciated. Actually I think that this, rather than being about LISTSERV's interaction with PP, is only about PP: can anyone tell Pamela how to set up aliases in that MTA so that a particular program gets run when mail is received? Pamela, is there a list for discussion of PP? Because that's probably where you'd find the answer the fastest. (LISTSERV's sendmail aliases are nothing tricky, just stuff like this: listname: "/usr/local/bin/lsv_amin -t listname" listname-request: "/usr/local/bin/lsv_amin -t listname-request" owner-listname: "/usr/local/bin/lsv_amin -t owner-listname" ) -- Norm ... clearly a man of many qualities, even if they were mostly bad ones. [Douglas Adams] From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 8 07:23:19 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id HAA19912 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 07:10:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from netcomsv.netcom.com (uucp7.netcom.com [163.179.3.7]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id HAA19903 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 07:10:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from duke.sagarmatha.com by netcomsv.netcom.com with UUCP (8.6.12/SMI-4.1) id HAA16966; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 07:08:48 -0700 Received: by duke (Smail3.1.28.1 #64) id m0uoUQN-000gd3C; Thu, 8 Aug 96 05:42 PDT Message-Id: From: james@sagarmatha.com (James C. Armstrong) Subject: More from CIS (fwd) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 05:42:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Apparently, my subscriber is making progress... According to unnamed sources, Gordon Lamb is alleged to have written => 2) I am surprised that our software caused the change. However, I note your => point and will have this problem looked into. On this note you mention in your => previous message that you had a message from the list administrator explaining => the problem in more detail. I would be grateful if you could let me have a copy => of this message so that this can also be looked into further. I've forwarded Gordon a copy of the mail that originally describes the problem, and will be digging up a copy of the relevant RFC that describes how sites should bounce back administrative mail to mailing lists. If we're lucky, we may actually end up correcting this problem for all our mailing lists! -- James C. Armstrong, Jr. | It's time to taste what you most fear james@sagarmatha.com (home) | Right Guard will not help you here. | Brace yourself, my dear! | It's a holiday in Cambodia! From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 8 08:25:06 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id IAA27659 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 08:17:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sacusr.mp.usbr.gov (sacusr.mp.usbr.gov [140.214.12.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id IAA27651 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 08:17:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by sacto.mp.usbr.gov (MX V4.2 VAX) id 32; Thu, 08 Aug 1996 08:17:25 PDT Date: Thu, 08 Aug 1996 08:17:22 PDT From: "Henry W. Miller" To: james@sagarmatha.com CC: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM, henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009A688A.7D69A784.32@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: RE: More from CIS (fwd) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > From: MX%"james@sagarmatha.com" 8-AUG-1996 07:30:51.88 > Subj: More from CIS (fwd) > Apparently, my subscriber is making progress... > > According to unnamed sources, Gordon Lamb is alleged to have written > => 2) I am surprised that our software caused the change. However, I note your > => point and will have this problem looked into. On this note you mention in your > => previous message that you had a message from the list administrator explaining > => the problem in more detail. I would be grateful if you could let me have a copy > => of this message so that this can also be looked into further. > > I've forwarded Gordon a copy of the mail that originally describes > the problem, and will be digging up a copy of the relevant RFC > that describes how sites should bounce back administrative mail to > mailing lists. > > If we're lucky, we may actually end up correcting this problem for all > our mailing lists! > -- > James C. Armstrong, Jr. | It's time to taste what you most fear > james@sagarmatha.com (home) | Right Guard will not help you here. > | Brace yourself, my dear! > | It's a holiday in Cambodia! James, Great work! Maybe if they won't listen to reason, they'll listen to their customers, if there is a chance that their non-compliance will erode their customer base! -HWM From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 8 09:41:07 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id JAA06078 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 09:33:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay.mod.uk (relay.mod.uk [192.5.29.50]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id JAA06029 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 09:33:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.dra.hmg.gb by relay.mod.uk with local SMTP id ; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 17:32:35 +0100 Received: from wandle.dra.hmg.gb by hermes.dra.hmg.gb (MX V4.1 VAX) with SMTP; Thu, 08 Aug 1996 17:32:20 GMT Received: from rivers.dra.hmg.gb by wandle.dra.hmg.gb with smtp(Smail3.1.28.1 #64) id m0uoY08-0007UqC; Thu, 8 Aug 96 17:32 WET DST X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.5 12/11/95 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM CC: Jack Kessler Subject: Re: More from CIS (fwd) Organization: IT Vulnerabilities Group, DRA Malvern, UK References: In-reply-to: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 08 Aug 1996 17:32:00 +0100 Message-ID: <27818.839521920@rivers.dra.hmg.gb> From: Christopher Samuel Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message , james@sagarmatha.com (James C. Armstrong) writes: > Apparently, my subscriber is making progress... [deletia] > > I've forwarded Gordon a copy of the mail that originally describes > the problem, and will be digging up a copy of the relevant RFC > that describes how sites should bounce back administrative mail to > mailing lists. They've already had quite a full description from myself a few months ago after a similar debacle, at which point I banned all CompuServe subscribers. It took a while to get them to respond, again it had to come from one of their customers before they took any notice (they must just file all Postmaster e-mail in /dev/null). I've cc'd this message to the person who eventually contacted me. Perhaps they'd like to join the list-managers mailing list, or at least comment on it on how they're getting on with making their mail system compliant to the RFCs.. Chris From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 8 10:08:04 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id KAA09203 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 10:05:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sacusr.mp.usbr.gov (sacusr.mp.usbr.gov [140.214.12.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id KAA09190 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 10:05:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by sacto.mp.usbr.gov (MX V4.2 VAX) id 36; Thu, 08 Aug 1996 10:05:23 PDT Date: Thu, 08 Aug 1996 10:05:19 PDT From: "Henry W. Miller" To: chris@rivers.dra.hmg.gb CC: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM, henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009A6899.9201B2AE.36@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: Re: More from CIS (fwd) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > From: MX%"chris@rivers.dra.hmg.gb" 8-AUG-1996 09:45:05.01 > Subj: Re: More from CIS (fwd) > In message , > james@sagarmatha.com (James C. Armstrong) writes: > > > Apparently, my subscriber is making progress... > [deletia] > > > > I've forwarded Gordon a copy of the mail that originally describes > > the problem, and will be digging up a copy of the relevant RFC > > that describes how sites should bounce back administrative mail to > > mailing lists. > > They've already had quite a full description from myself a few months > ago after a similar debacle, at which point I banned all CompuServe > subscribers. It took a while to get them to respond, again it had > to come from one of their customers before they took any notice (they > must just file all Postmaster e-mail in /dev/null). > > I've cc'd this message to the person who eventually contacted me. > Perhaps they'd like to join the list-managers mailing list, or at > least comment on it on how they're getting on with making their mail > system compliant to the RFCs.. > > Chris > Chris, Before you started pounding on them, I wonder if they could even spell RFC. I wonder if anyone has suggested to them that they might try attending IETF? Best, and thanks for your efforts, Chris, -HWM From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 8 14:24:55 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id OAA06237 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 14:00:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) id OAA06217 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 14:00:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.zrz.TU-Berlin.DE (mail.zrz.TU-Berlin.DE [130.149.4.15]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id GAA16610 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 06:01:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199608081301.GAA16610@miles.greatcircle.com> Received: from localhost (actually mail.zrz.TU-Berlin.DE) by mail.zrz.TU-Berlin.DE with SMTP (PP); Thu, 8 Aug 1996 14:41:43 +0200 To: Pamela Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: PP and LISTSERV In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 08 Aug 1996 12:22:46 GMT" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 08 Aug 1996 14:41:41 +0200 From: TUBerlin Postmaster Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Thu, 08 Aug 1996 12:22:46 GMT Pamela wrote: > Is there anyone who has LISTERV running with PP, > is so any help would be much appreciated. Not knowing LISTERV but PP I would guess there must be an entry in the users table like "listserv:shell" and an appropriate entry in the ch.shell table like "listserv:listserv,0,/listserv ... " > Pam Hope it helps __________________________________________ TUBerlin Postmaster (Frank Elsner) / c/o Technische Universitaet Berlin | _________________________________/ ZRZ, Sekr. E-N 50 | | Einsteinufer 17 | |Voice: +49 30 314 23897 D-10587 Berlin | |SMTP : postmaster@TU-Berlin.DE Germany | |X400 : /S=postmaster/P=TU-Berlin/A=d400/C=de/ | |_____________________________________________________________________________| From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 8 15:23:28 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id PAA13167 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 15:14:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bbfm.di.com (bbfm.di.com [207.71.205.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id PAA13130 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 15:14:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tomorrow by bbfm.di.com (8.6.10/TD-1.22) with SMTP id PAA06373 for on Thu, 8 Aug 1996 15:03:20 -0700 Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960808221137.00c7c928@mail.di.com> X-Sender: today@mail.di.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 08 Aug 1996 15:11:37 -0700 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Todd Day Subject: User wants to be removed from list archives Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Concerning archives of user submitted posts, we have... >I am under the impression that any work of any >author is automatically copyrighted by that author (with or without the >copyright notice) and publishing that work does not make it public >domain ...and... >It does seem to me obvious that if I post messages about my lost cat on all >the telephone poles in town, the copyright in the messages is still mine; >this does not give me the right to demand that the telephone company clean >them all up. ...and... >It's a scandal to ask for one thing and the contrary : to be ready to use >the advantages of co-operative work and to keep the advantages of an >entirely individual way of acting. ...and... >Someone else mentioned telling them "tough cookies" and saying they'd >have to sue to get it changed. This won't work well either; no >public (or private) university wants to hear that they're getting >sued because some computer admin doesn't respect copyrights over >some list that university might not even be aware of or officially >sanction. I'm surprised that no one mentioned the obvious correlation to the opinion section of any newspaper or letters section of a magazine. It might be that the opinion piece writer has copyright protection, but that doesn't buy the right to seek out all copies of the newspaper and destroy the part that they wrote. Also, I don't think the writer would have the right to have their work removed from the newspaper's central archives and microfilm unless the editor had made some mistake when the piece was printed. I agree with the notion that list discussion should be considered a group-ware project, not owned by the individual. Conversation and dialog require more than one party. I don't recommend taking the "so sue me" approach. Gentle explanation of "the way things are" would be a much better approach. It seems that at least once a week, the list-managers-digest gives me yet another paragraph to add to my digest policy sheet/disclaimer. Sigh. -todd- From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 8 19:08:12 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id SAA12152 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 18:54:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id SAA12143 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 18:54:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from (alancz@hou-tx9-25.ix.netcom.com [204.32.167.121]) by dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com (8.6.13/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA05631 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 18:54:38 -0700 Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 18:54:38 -0700 Message-Id: <199608090154.SAA05631@dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com> From: alancz@ix.netcom.com (Alan Czarnek) Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Todd Day said >I agree with the notion that list discussion should be considered a >group-ware project, not owned by the individual. Conversation and >dialog require more than one party. ------ OK Todd, Suppose you are particpating in a particularly profound group discussion and one member takes the posts from the group, including your verbatim messages, and publishes them in book form. The book becomes a best seller and the person who took all your work makes millions, and you get nothing. That might be OK with you, but if that happened to me, I would be steamed. As far as I am concerned, that would be theft, and that is why we have copyright laws. Alan Cz From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 8 21:08:01 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id VAA22396 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 21:05:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.his.com (mail.his.com [205.177.25.9]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id VAA22389 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 21:05:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.177.25.174] (brad.his.com [205.177.25.174]) by mail.his.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id AAA07853; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 00:05:52 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 23:55:06 -0400 To: james@sagarmatha.com (James C. Armstrong), list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: More from CIS (fwd) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 8:42 AM -0400 8/8/96, James C. Armstrong wrote: >I've forwarded Gordon a copy of the mail that originally describes >the problem, and will be digging up a copy of the relevant RFC >that describes how sites should bounce back administrative mail to >mailing lists. Well, I hope they don't change too fast. I forwarded the original note on this subject to folks at work, and I know that we'd be very interested in grabbing large chunks of CompuServe's user base and growing ourselves at their expense -- all because they don't have a clue as to how to write an SMTP MTA. I can assure you, we know how to spell RFC (I've got one I'm mulling over writing myself), we read the RFCs, and have debated whether it makes sense for us to attend IETF. We *are* a member of the Internet Mail Consortium, and I note that we are the only Online Service that can say that. Personally, I think this speaks volumes for our commitment to doing Internet mail better than any of the other Online Services, with a slightly more long-term goal of flat being the best in the world at Internet mail. -- Brad Knowles, MIME/PGP: brad@his.com comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer finger brad@his.com for my PGP Public Keys and Geek Code The comp.mail.sendmail FAQ is at From list-managers-owner Fri Aug 9 01:52:59 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id BAA05257 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 01:44:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bbfm.di.com (bbfm.di.com [207.71.205.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id BAA05247 for ; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 01:44:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tomorrow by bbfm.di.com (8.6.10/TD-1.22) with SMTP id BAA11451 for on Fri, 9 Aug 1996 01:32:32 -0700 Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960809084200.00cb95b0@mail.di.com> X-Sender: today@mail.di.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 09 Aug 1996 01:42:00 -0700 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Todd Day Subject: group-ware archives Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >Suppose you are particpating in a particularly profound group >discussion and one member takes the posts from the group, including >your verbatim messages, and publishes them in book form. The book >becomes a best seller and the person who took all your work makes >millions, and you get nothing. That would fly in the face of a true group-ware project. I've explicitly claimed "compilation" copyright on all the digests in the archive of the list I moderate. I also re-iterate the copyrights of the respective authors of the messages contained by the archive. I then give permission to use the information on a personal-use/not-for-profit basis only. I'm hoping but don't know for certain that this would give us protection against anyone doing what you described. -todd- From list-managers-owner Fri Aug 9 02:38:38 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id CAA07712 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 02:27:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from domen.uninett.no (domen.uninett.no [129.241.131.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id CAA07705 for ; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 02:26:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dale.uninett.no by domen.uninett.no with SMTP (PP) id <04899-0@domen.uninett.no>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 11:26:57 +0200 Received: from dale.uninett.no (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dale.uninett.no (8.6.9/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA29644; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 11:26:49 +0200 From: Harald.T.Alvestrand@uninett.no To: Norm Aleks cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: PP and LISTSERV In-reply-to: Your message of "08 Aug 1996 08:50:01 EDT." MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <29640.839582807.1@dale.uninett.no> Date: Fri, 09 Aug 1996 11:26:48 +0200 Message-ID: <29642.839582808@dale.uninett.no> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk For running programs when mail arrives, look at the documentation for the SHELL channel of PP. That is a bit more flexible than sendmail aliases; you can also specify some interesting parameters, and you get to tell the system which UID to run the program as. Harald A From list-managers-owner Fri Aug 9 08:52:56 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id IAA04397 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 08:46:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from speedy.grolier.fr (speedy.grolier.fr [194.158.97.87]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id IAA04390 for ; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 08:46:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [194.117.205.29] (ppp71.hexagone.club-internet.fr [194.117.205.71]) by speedy.grolier.fr (8.7.5/MGC-960516) with SMTP id RAA10316 for ; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 17:44:04 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Fri, 9 Aug 1996 17:44:04 +0200 (MET DST) X-Sender: ozablock@mail.club-internet.fr Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: ozablock@club-internet.fr (Olivier Zablocki) Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Alan Czarnek said >The book becomes a best seller and the person who took all your work makes >millions, and you get nothing. and Todd Day answered: >That would fly in the face of a true group-ware project. If it's possible to follow on that way : I think that we should consider and be able to defend the position that there is only one owner of thoses works. I mean the list itself or more precisely the co-operative of the suscribers. More often the problem is that this co-operative, (this mutual brain) has no legal existence or representation and it's difficult to send the millions back to a legal ghost! Think that there is always someone (the list) missing at the negociation on those copyright subjects. From list-managers-owner Fri Aug 9 12:07:56 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id MAA18094 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 12:00:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lokkur.dexter.mi.us (lokkur.dexter.mi.us [148.59.2.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id LAA17977 for ; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 11:59:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from scs@localhost) by lokkur.dexter.mi.us (8.7.5/8.7.5/lokkur-1.1-scs) id OAA20162; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 14:59:09 -0400 (EDT) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Path: lokkur.dexter.mi.us!not-for-mail From: scs@lokkur.dexter.mi.us (Steve Simmons) Newsgroups: local.list-managers Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives Date: 9 Aug 1996 14:59:08 -0400 Organization: Inland Sea Lines: 31 Distribution: local Message-ID: <4ug1ps$jlv@lokkur.dexter.mi.us> References: <199608090154.SAA05631@dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com> X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 CURRENT #2 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk alancz@ix.netcom.com (Alan Czarnek) writes: >Suppose you are particpating in a particularly profound group >discussion and one member takes the posts from the group, including >your verbatim messages, and publishes them in book form. The book >becomes a best seller and the person who took all your work makes >millions, and you get nothing. >That might be OK with you, but if that happened to me, I would be >steamed. As far as I am concerned, that would be theft, and that is >why we have copyright laws. It would absolutely *be* theft. By the Berne Convention, unless you explicitly renounce copyright you own the reproduction right on everything you write. I don't know a mailing list which requires you to explicitly renounce copyright. However, I don't think your ownership of copyright permits you to pull back items off the list. You've given a copy to the group for the groups reading pleasure. The copyright prevents the group from re-using the writing for other purposes, but the group itself can keep its copies. The key question w/r/t archive is `group'. Is the group the members of the list at the time you sent it, or all past, present and future members of the list? Until this issue goes to court it'll be an open question. Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, ya-da, ya-da. -- Rep. Steve Largent, R-Okla. "No culture that has ever embraced homosexuality has ever survived." Steve, no culture has ever survived. They all decline and fall. Homosexuality somehow stays with the human race, though. -- Rob Morse, San Francisco Herald-Examiner From list-managers-owner Fri Aug 9 12:52:56 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id MAA20825 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 12:39:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from server.postmodern.com (server.postmodern.com [207.33.130.54]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id MAA20818 for ; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 12:39:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 207.33.130.51 (derrida.postmodern.com [207.33.130.51]) by server.postmodern.com (8.7.4/mcb-960422) with SMTP id MAA18477; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 12:39:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <320B93FD.1F8@postmodern.com> Date: Fri, 09 Aug 1996 12:42:40 -0700 From: "Michael C. Berch" Reply-To: mcb@postmodern.com Organization: Postmodern Consulting, California USA X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b6a (Macintosh; I; 68K) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives References: <199608090154.SAA05631@dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com> <4ug1ps$jlv@lokkur.dexter.mi.us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Steve Simmons wrote: > > alancz@ix.netcom.com (Alan Czarnek) writes: > > >Suppose you are particpating in a particularly profound group > >discussion and one member takes the posts from the group, including > >your verbatim messages, and publishes them in book form. The book > >becomes a best seller and the person who took all your work makes > >millions, and you get nothing. > > >That might be OK with you, but if that happened to me, I would be > >steamed. As far as I am concerned, that would be theft, and that is > >why we have copyright laws. > > It would absolutely *be* theft. By the Berne Convention, unless you > explicitly renounce copyright you own the reproduction right on everything > you write. Except for the mouldy old question of exactly what rights you have exercised by publishing the material on the Net, and exactly how far that exercise extends in finding the limits of online publication. Consider: Mailing list message -> FTP archive -> CD-ROM -> Book Usenet article -> DejaNews -> CD-ROM -> Book The first cases are obvious; you have directly posted a message to a list or a newsgroup -- no copyright issue there. A list archive or news archive is, in some ways, similar to a site that keeps things around for longer than the normal expiration policy, and (possibly) opens them to the public. (A possible distinction could be made for the "limited" publication to a small list, vs. "general" publication in a newsgroup, but I'm not sure of any legal difference.) What about CD-ROMs and books? How do they differ from online archives? If DejaNews or a list archive site is not theft, why would a book be? Most of us have a sort of gut feeling about the difference, but there's no reason to believe that it would be convincing in a court of law, or, more frighteningly, that all courts interpreting their own national copyright law (in the light of the Berne Convention, assuming they are members) would come to the same conclusion. My two favourite words in talking about copyright law on the Net are "probably" and "maybe." :-) -- Michael C. Berch (who is, alas, a lawyer, among other things) mcb@postmodern.com / mcb@greatcircle.com From list-managers-owner Fri Aug 9 14:23:11 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id OAA27990 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 14:09:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.11]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id OAA27969 for ; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 14:09:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from (alancz@hou-tx11-24.ix.netcom.com [204.32.167.184]) by dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com (8.6.13/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA24769 for ; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 14:09:15 -0700 Date: Fri, 9 Aug 1996 14:09:15 -0700 Message-Id: <199608092109.OAA24769@dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com> From: alancz@ix.netcom.com (Alan Czarnek) Subject: User wants to be removed from list archive To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >Michael Berch said........... > >>If DejaNews or a list archive site is not theft, why would a book be? >------ > Well........ Maybe DejaNews *IS* theft. After all, they are using copyrighted material without the expressed permission of the authors (copyright owners,) aren't they? Has anyone taken them to court, and if so, what was the outcome? If DejaNews had to pay a licensing fee of say, 2 cents, for every message they have gathered, it would add up to a tidy sum............ Alan Cz From list-managers-owner Fri Aug 9 15:07:56 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id PAA01688 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 15:03:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from server.postmodern.com (server.postmodern.com [207.33.130.54]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id PAA01681 for ; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 15:03:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 207.33.130.51 (derrida.postmodern.com [207.33.130.51]) by server.postmodern.com (8.7.4/mcb-960422) with SMTP id PAA19030; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 15:04:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <320BB5CE.3D2B@postmodern.com> Date: Fri, 09 Aug 1996 15:07:07 -0700 From: "Michael C. Berch" Reply-To: mcb@postmodern.com Organization: Postmodern Consulting, California USA X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b6a (Macintosh; I; 68K) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archive References: <199608092109.OAA24769@dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Alan Czarnek wrote: > > >Michael Berch said........... > > > >>If DejaNews or a list archive site is not theft, why would a book be? > > Well........ > > Maybe DejaNews *IS* theft. After all, they are using copyrighted > material without the expressed permission of the authors (copyright > owners,) aren't they? Suppose I have a plain old netnews site, and I have lots and lots of disks, so I don't need to expire articles, and I am a charitable person, so I offer free accounts to whomever wants them, in order to read news. Am I violating the copyrights of the authors of the news articles? Assuming I am not, how does this materially differ from DejaNews? I don't think DejaNews is a copyright infringement, any more than any other netnews site is, because the copies are not made without the consent of the copyright owner -- in fact, by the act of posting, the author sets into motion the mechanism by which DejaNews's copy is made. -- Michael C. Berch mcb@postmodern.com From list-managers-owner Fri Aug 9 17:38:13 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id RAA09020 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 17:26:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from apc.net (apc.net [206.135.15.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id RAA09005 for ; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 17:26:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bobs.apc.net by apc.net with SMTP (IPAD 1.1e) id 2729100 ; Fri, 09 Aug 96 17:22:33 UTC Message-ID: <320BD2DF.192@apc.net> Date: Fri, 09 Aug 1996 17:07:59 -0700 From: Bob X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Steve Simmons CC: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: User wants to be removed from list archives References: <199608090154.SAA05631@dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com> <4ug1ps$jlv@lokkur.dexter.mi.us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Steve Simmons wrote: > > alancz@ix.netcom.com (Alan Czarnek) writes: > > >Suppose you are particpating in a particularly profound group > >discussion and one member takes the posts from the group, including > >your verbatim messages, and publishes them in book form. The book > >becomes a best seller and the person who took all your work makes > >millions, and you get nothing. > > >That might be OK with you, but if that happened to me, I would be > >steamed. As far as I am concerned, that would be theft, and that is > >why we have copyright laws. > > It would absolutely *be* theft. By the Berne Convention, unless you > explicitly renounce copyright you own the reproduction right on everything > you write. I don't know a mailing list which requires you to explicitly > renounce copyright. > > However, I don't think your ownership of copyright permits you to pull > back items off the list. You've given a copy to the group for the groups > reading pleasure. The copyright prevents the group from re-using the > writing for other purposes, but the group itself can keep its copies. > The key question w/r/t archive is `group'. Is the group the members of > the list at the time you sent it, or all past, present and future members > of the list? Until this issue goes to court it'll be an open question. > > Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, ya-da, ya-da. > -- > Rep. Steve Largent, R-Okla. "No culture that has ever embraced > homosexuality has ever survived." Steve, no culture has ever survived. > They all decline and fall. Homosexuality somehow stays with the human > race, though. -- Rob Morse, San Francisco Herald-Examineri would like to unsubscribe from the list bobs@apc.net From list-managers-owner Sat Aug 10 02:11:14 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id BAA27471 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 10 Aug 1996 01:33:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id BAA27462 for ; Sat, 10 Aug 1996 01:33:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mne.ifi.uio.no (1232@mne.ifi.uio.no [129.240.70.5]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id ; Sat, 10 Aug 1996 10:33:29 +0200 From: Kjetil Torgrim Homme Received: (from kjetilho@localhost) by mne.ifi.uio.no ; Sat, 10 Aug 1996 10:33:27 +0200 Date: Sat, 10 Aug 1996 10:33:27 +0200 Message-Id: <199608100833.18240.mne.ifi.uio.no@ifi.uio.no> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Cc: postmaster@sun.dmci.net Subject: Phony subscriptions Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Just had another run of phony subscriptions: markoffnyt@aol.com jeffgood@aol.com quit@interramp.com mslat@echonyc.com tsutomu@sdsc.edu quit@newsday.com aspg70@email.mot.com 76201.3211@compuserve.com crunch@well.com johnm@well.sf.ca.us 74044.164@compuserve.com zando@ix.netcom.com The headers look like this: Received: from sun.dmci.net (sun.dmci.net [198.109.130.33]) by ifi.uio.no with SMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id for ; Sat, 10 Aug 1996 10:25:55 +0200 Received: from ix.netcom.com by sun.dmci.net with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 #1) id m0up9BH-000dKWC; Sat, 10 Aug 96 04:13 EDT Message-Id: Date: Sat, 10 Aug 96 04:13 EDT From: zando To: majordomo@ifi.uio.no Subject: subscribe Kjetil T. From list-managers-owner Sat Aug 10 04:08:01 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id EAA08155 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 10 Aug 1996 04:03:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.oulu.fi (lists.oulu.fi [130.231.241.85]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id EAA08148 for ; Sat, 10 Aug 1996 04:03:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (mhotti@localhost) by lists.oulu.fi (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id OAA12737; Sat, 10 Aug 1996 14:05:43 +0300 Date: Sat, 10 Aug 1996 14:05:43 +0300 (EET DST) From: Marko Hotti To: Kjetil Torgrim Homme cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, postmaster@sun.dmci.net Subject: Re: Phony subscriptions In-Reply-To: <199608100833.18240.mne.ifi.uio.no@ifi.uio.no> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Our mailing list server received these requests as well but they didn't get processed since I'm using filtering software. dmci.net has been used earlier this year for similar forged subscriptions. Does anyone remember which address in CERT receives information on new spam efforts? --Marko -- Marko Hotti Faculty of Medicine University of Oulu, FINLAND Email: Marko.Hotti@oulu.fi http://raita.oulu.fi/~mhotti/ Home: +358 81 530 4268 System Administrator of 'lists.oulu.fi' Work: +358 40 552 8415 Tervontie 4 C 11, FIN-90230 OULU From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 12 04:12:42 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id EAA05552 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 04:11:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.oulu.fi (lists.oulu.fi [130.231.241.85]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id EAA05544 for ; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 04:11:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (mhotti@localhost) by lists.oulu.fi (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id OAA03817; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 14:13:06 +0300 Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 14:13:05 +0300 (EET DST) From: Marko Hotti To: Marc Miller cc: root@dmci.net, list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: SPAM subscriptions coming from your site!!!!!!! Please check this! 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, 10 Aug 1996, Marc Miller wrote: > > Thanks for the "heads up" on this. We'll be switching over to a different > mail package in a few days and eliminate the problem. I'll contact you when > this has happened and request you to take dmci.net off the blacklist. Thanks > again. I will not take dmci.net off the blacklist because these forged requests still keep coming. See below... From rking@teledotcom.com Mon Aug 12 14:10:25 1996 Received: from sun.dmci.net (sun.dmci.net [198.109.130.33]) by lists.oulu.fi (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id IAA32413 for ; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 08:59:17 +0300 Received: from teledotcom.com by sun.dmci.net with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 #1) id m0upoxR-000dIrC; Mon, 12 Aug 96 00:50 EDT Message-Id: Date: Mon, 12 Aug 96 00:50 EDT From: rking To: majordomo@lists.oulu.fi Subject: subscribe subscribe EXC94 subscribe bco subscribe beloved subscribe bounces subscribe cursus-huusko subscribe cursus-laari subscribe ekl-paul subscribe excu96 subscribe excu96ad subscribe feyerabend subscribe feyerabend-digest subscribe finlandia subscribe finlandia-digest subscribe fitness subscribe fitness-digest subscribe inetaa subscribe kaijo subscribe kinternet subscribe kuluttajapuntari subscribe medisiinarit subscribe netix subscribe ok subscribe pin subscribe suspend subscribe teekkaritorvet subscribe testilista subscribe timewarp subscribe tutkimus-biotekniikka subscribe tutkimus-eu subscribe tutkimus-laaketiede subscribe tutkimus-maaseutu subscribe tutkimus-pkyritykset subscribe tutkimus-smt subscribe tutkimus-sosek subscribe tutkimus-telematiikka subscribe tutkimus-teollisuus subscribe tutkimus-tietotekniikka subscribe tutkimus-ymparisto subscribe verbapapa subscribe vesiyhdistys subscribe vocalist subscribe vocalist-digest subscribe ystinfo ok -- Marko Hotti Faculty of Medicine University of Oulu, FINLAND Email: Marko.Hotti@oulu.fi http://raita.oulu.fi/~mhotti/ Home: +358 81 530 4268 System Administrator of 'lists.oulu.fi' Work: +358 40 552 8415 Tervontie 4 C 11, FIN-90230 OULU From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 12 06:42:53 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id GAA11856 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 06:36:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from biome.bio.dfo.ca (biome.BIO.dfo.ca [142.2.20.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id GAA11849 for ; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 06:36:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by biome.bio.dfo.ca (920330.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO) for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM id AA19326; Mon, 12 Aug 96 10:36:55 -0300 From: bill@biome.bio.dfo.ca (Bill Silvert) Message-Id: <9608121336.AA19326@biome.bio.dfo.ca> Subject: More on expired accounts To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 10:36:24 -0300 (ADT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk There seems to be a point missing in the lengthy discussion about expired accounts. For example, Chris Cook writes (in part): > We have a userbase of roughly 20,000 staff and >students and hence have a turnover of approximately 6,000 usernames and... > >Subsequently we've decided to keep vacated usernames for a period of a year or >so to ensure that recycling doesn't happen too quickly. During that period >the user's mail will be forwarded to a certain address where an automatic >script will respond that the username no longer exists.... But neither he nor anyone else points out that one might inform the users from time to time that they can set their own mail forwarding, at least on many kinds of systems. I have found that many users, even computer-savvy summer students are unaware that when they leave here they can arrange to have all email forwarded to a new address, and generally all I do is make the account non-login. The practice of cancelling accounts as soon as someone leaves causes list-managers and other correspondents a lot of trouble, and it really isn't a fair policy. After all, how would we feel if as soon as we move the post office starts discarding or returning all our smail without providing any forwarding service or even telling people what happened? A side effect is that when I tell users that they can have their email forwarded they are usually both surprised and delighted -- it is an easy way to make friends! -- Bill Silvert, Habitat Ecology Section, Bedford Institute of Oceanography, P. O. Box 1006, Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, CANADA B2Y 4A2, Tel. (902)426-1577 From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 12 10:27:39 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id KAA27703 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 10:17:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaughan.fac.unbc.edu (vaughan.fac.unbc.edu [142.207.33.84]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id KAA27696 for ; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 10:17:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from lynda@localhost) by vaughan.fac.unbc.edu (8.6.12/8.6.9) id KAA23176; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 10:17:28 -0700 Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 10:17:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Lynda Williams To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: bounced mail policy Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk What is the usual policy for dealing with addresses in a mailing list which bounce mail? Try to send a message by hand? Delete the address from the list after a grace period? If this is a FAQ, please give directions to the FAQ and accept my appologies. ---------------------------------------- Lynda Williams lynda@vaughan.fac.unbc.edu University of Northern B.C. From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 12 10:44:09 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id KAA29810 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 10:41:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from camco.celestial.com (camco.celestial.com [192.136.111.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id KAA29801 for ; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 10:41:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by camco.celestial.com (Smail3.1.29.1 #1) id m0uq126-0007uQC; Mon, 12 Aug 96 10:44 PDT Message-Id: From: bill@celestial.com (Bill Campbell) Subject: Re: bounced mail policy To: lynda@vaughan.fac.unbc.edu (Lynda Williams) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 10:44:05 -0700 (PDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: from "Lynda Williams" at Aug 12, 96 10:17:28 am Reply-To: bill@Celestial.COM Organization: Celestial Software, Mercer Island, WA 98040 X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > > >What is the usual policy for dealing with addresses in a mailing list >which bounce mail? Try to send a message by hand? Delete the address >from the list after a grace period? > My policy depends on the type of bounce. If it's an invalid user message, I send this message to the postmaster at the postmaster: "Has this user been deleted from your system or is this a temporary mailer glitch? This is mailing list traffic that has been successful in the past, and I will remove this entry from the list if it's no longer valid, but I've found that the majority of these bounces are temporary mailer configuration problems." I have a similar message that I send for multiple users at a site. My experience is that about 80% of the bounces are temporary problems. For bad user accounts at delphi.com and ix.netcom.com, I just delete them immediately since their policy is not to ``release information'' about their customers so I don't waste my time. We frequently see problems immediately after someone subscribes in which our mailer can't talk to theirs for some reason or other (timeouts, SMTP errors, etc.), and I immediately delete these since there seems to be something basically wrong. Bill -- INTERNET: bill@Celestial.COM Bill Campbell; Celestial Systems, Inc. UUCP: camco!bill PO Box 820; 2835 82nd Avenue S.E. S-100 FAX: (206) 232-9186 Mercer Island, WA 98040-0820; (206) 236-1676 URL: http://www.celestial.com/ The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. Instead of altering their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit their views ... which can be very uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that needs altering. -- Doctor Who, "Face of Evil" From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 12 11:45:12 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id LAA07431 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 11:36:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id LAA07388 for ; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 11:36:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (tibbs@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA12821; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 13:36:29 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199608121836.NAA12821@sina.hpc.uh.edu> To: lynda@vaughan.fac.unbc.edu Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: bounced mail policy In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 12 Aug 1996 10:17:28 -0700 (PDT)" References: X-Mailer: Mew beta version 0.98 on Emacs 19.30.1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 13:36:28 -0500 From: Jason L Tibbitts III Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >>>>> "LW" == Lynda Williams writes: LW> What is the usual policy for dealing with addresses in a mailing list LW> which bounce mail? That depends on the nature of your list and how nice you want to be. With a small list where I try to keep tabs on all of the members I do my best to make certain that a user really is gone before I delete them, and I generally ignore errors which I recognize as temporary (full mail spool or bad mailer configuration at their site, etc.). On a big list I just nuke any address that bounces two days in a row. I'm merciless for any address that produces one of those useless bounces, like "Press F1 for help with error codes". Under no circumstances do I ever keep an address that bounces due to an unreachable host, as I queue outbound mail for a week; if I can't get to the host for over a week I don't bother trying. After a while you will probably come to recognize sites that have transient problems; netcom.com often will drop a whole batch of addresses as nonexistent for no reason, and many sites run close to the wire when it comes to disk space. -- Jason L. Tibbitts III - tibbs@uh.edu - 713/743-8684 - 221SR1 System Manager: University of Houston High Performance Computing Center 1994 PC800 "Kuroneko" DoD# 1723 From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 12 16:12:50 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id PAA08287 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 15:58:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from weber.ucsd.edu (weber.ucsd.edu [132.239.147.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id PAA08254 for ; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 15:58:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from cnorman@localhost) by weber.ucsd.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id PAA19509; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 15:58:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 15:58:07 -0700 (PDT) From: Cyndi Norman Message-Id: <199608122258.PAA19509@weber.ucsd.edu> To: lynda@vaughan.fac.unbc.edu CC: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, cnorman@weber.ucsd.edu In-reply-to: Lynda Williams's message of Mon, 12 Aug 1996 10:17:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: bounced mail policy Reply-to: cnorman@weber.ucsd.edu Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 10:17:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Lynda Williams What is the usual policy for dealing with addresses in a mailing list which bounce mail? Try to send a message by hand? Delete the address from the list after a grace period? It really depends on the list and the list manager. You have to weigh convience and kindness. SOme people remove addresses if they bounce once. I don't, because I subscribe people by hand and bounces usually resolve themselves after a couple of days. It's more of a pain in the neck for me to rmeove people too quickly. I also have a bunch of people with regular bouncing. Like 1 bounce every day or two (of 20 messages/day). These are people with poor connections and where I've talked to the postmasters about it. SOme of my subscribers have connections that go out every few months for a couple of days. I ignore those if they last for less than a week or so. I get a lot of full mailboxes. These can drive me crazy. I ignore them until they've been going on for about a week. Every so often I get into a frenzy and delete every full mailbox in one fail swoop. I ignore bounces that are delays, not returned mail. Though some people here have mentioned how that can be correctable for repeat offenders. I'd like to know more about that. If the delay becomes a returned mail after 5 days, I delete the address immediately. For unknown users, I wait a few days to see if it resolves (about 75% do). AOL unknown users are usually accurate but I give it one extra business day since a good percentage are people who are late paying their bills. Prodigy, netcom, and compuserve unknown users are usually accurate and I'll remove them right away. Remember that bounce messages can be misleading. I've had people on my list get messages saying my username and/or host is unknown, and this is a consistant and reliable address. If the intro message I send to a new subscriber bounces, they are off right away. You should also talk to your local postmaster about this. Remember that they get copies of all the bounces. Mine is okay with my policies. He just cares that I pay attention to the boucnes and have some policy for dealing with them. I used to try to track down bounces by writing the postmaster and asking about new addresses, etc. That can be productive but I soon found it to be too time consuming and have stopped. The guidelines I use are what works for me. On another list, I might have totally different policies. You have to find what works for you: something that has the approval of your postmaster, is reasonably fair to your users, and is not too time consuming for you. Cyndi __________________________________________________________________________ "There's nothing wrong with me. Maybe there's Cyndi Norman something wrong with the universe." (ST:TNG) cnorman@ucsd.edu ___________________________________________ http://weber.ucsd.edu/~cnorman From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 12 16:42:39 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id QAA11824 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 16:28:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (kuhub.cc.ukans.edu [129.237.32.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id QAA11795 for ; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 16:28:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU by KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU (PMDF V5.0-6 #13311) id <01I8753DHEF48ZWAR0@KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU> for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 18:27:51 -0500 (UTC -05:00) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 18:27:51 -0500 (UTC -05:00) From: dirkcush@KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU Subject: listserv research To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi I am new to the list. I manage the music therapy listserv musthp-l. I am doing research on the use of the listserv and member perceptions. Would anyone know of similar research efforts that have been carried out for other lists. Specifically, I am looking for survey questions which have already been proven valid so I don't re-invent the wheel. Sincerely, Dirk Cushenbery From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 12 17:12:47 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id RAA16418 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 17:09:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from postie.das.gov.au (postie.das.gov.au [147.211.53.231]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id RAA16410 for ; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 17:09:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from garry.pur.das.gov.au (garry.pur.das.gov.au [147.211.63.110]) by postie.das.gov.au (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA29850; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 10:12:07 +1000 (EST) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 1996 10:12:07 +1000 (EST) Message-Id: <2.2.16.19960813100759.3767daac@zeus.das.gov.au> X-Sender: strden@zeus.das.gov.au X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Denis Strangman Subject: Re: listserv research Cc: dirkcush@KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 06:27 PM 12/08/96 -0500, Dirk Cushenbery wrote: >Hi I am new to the list. I manage the music therapy listserv musthp-l. >I am doing research on the use of the listserv and member perceptions. >Would anyone know of similar research efforts that have been carried out >for other lists. Specifically, I am looking for survey questions which >have already been proven valid so I don't re-invent the wheel. > >Sincerely, >Dirk Cushenbery > ====================== Hi Dirk and the List I am not sure there is too much correlation between public sector management and music therapy but who knows :-) I have recently conducted a survey of the members of PUBSEC which hosts discussions about public sector management, reform and commercialisation. I have placed the 35 part survey questionnaire on our ftp site at - ftp://caspa.itcs.das.gov.au/ Check the file named: survey.rtf There were 121 responses from a membership of 366. I am currently assembling the results and posting them to PUBSEC in parts. I could probably tell you a little about avoiding ambiguous questions - all from retrospective lessons obtained in analysing the responses!!! Cheers Denis Strangman Moderator PUBSEC Department of Administrative Services, GPO Box 1920 Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia. E-mail: denis.strangman@das.gov.au Phone: +61 6 2758808 fax +61 6 2753464 PUBSEC URL: http://www.das.gov.au/~world/listserv/pub_sec.html Have you checked out GELPROC? (Government ElectronicProcurement) URL: http://www.gems.gov.au/listserv/gelproc.htm From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 13 01:42:58 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id BAA19623 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 01:42:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from stork.cf.ac.uk (stork.cf.ac.uk [131.251.0.209]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id BAA19603 for ; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 01:41:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from thor.cf.ac.uk by stork.cf.ac.uk with SMTP (PP); Tue, 13 Aug 1996 09:40:33 +0100 Received: (from scocc@localhost) by thor.cf.ac.uk (8.7.4/8.6.12) id JAA23436 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 09:41:27 +0100 (BST) From: Chris Cook Message-Id: <199608130841.JAA23436@thor.cf.ac.uk> Subject: Re: More on expired accounts To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Tue, 13 Aug 1996 09:41:27 +0100 (BST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Previously Bill Silvert wrote - > But neither he nor anyone else points out that one might inform the > users from time to time that they can set their own mail forwarding, > at least on many kinds of systems. I have found that many users, even > computer-savvy summer students are unaware that when they leave here > they can arrange to have all email forwarded to a new address Increasingly people who graduate or move to another institution do have e-mail addresses to forward onto. User education is always the problem, the same as trying to encourage folk to leave lists whilst they're away for an extended period or when they leave. Agreed, it is a point I didn't touch on but now it's raised, what about the further complications. Say for six months we maintain a forwarding address for someone. Ideally in that time they would have resubscribed or left existing lists plus told all of their friends their new address. But we all know they don't do that. What would be useful would be when Elvis@cardiff.ac.uk leaves, we repoint her address (didn't you know?) to Elvis@new-place.co.uk but in such a way that any subsequent messages in addition to forwarding, get an automatic response. Something along the lines of Your message to Elvis@cardiff.ac.uk has been forwarded to Elvis@new-place.co.uk. Please update your address book for this person. > The practice of > cancelling accounts as soon as someone leaves causes list-managers and > other correspondents a lot of trouble, and it really isn't a fair > policy. I don't see what difference it makes whether you de-register an account immediately or six months down the road. The net result is the same, just deferred; lots of list managers still get lots of grief from "Username unknown" messages. The only difference is that six months more mail gets stored, unread by anyone. Besides, lots of places only prune old usernames once a year so there's nothing immediate about that. In the meantime, if you run a quotad mail store, anyone who was a member of a busy list will have long ago started annoying the owners with "Undeliverable - quota exceeded" variants. > > A side effect is that when I tell users that they can have their email > forwarded they are usually both surprised and delighted -- it is an easy > way to make friends! > Isn't it a joy to see their little eyes light up. Brings a lump to your throat and makes you think all that hard work was worthwhile :-) Chris _____________________________________________________________________________ | Chris Cook - Postmaster, UNIX and Athena Administrator | | University of Wales E-mail : CookC@Cardiff.AC.UK | | College of Cardiff, Phone : +44 1222 874875 | | 40-41 Park Place, (Direct) : +44 1222 874219 | | Cardiff, UK Fax : +44 1222 874285 | |___________________________________________________________________________| From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 13 03:57:46 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id DAA26368 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 03:51:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from aeat.co.uk (gw.aea.orgn.uk [151.182.136.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id DAA26314 for ; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 03:51:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jlines.harwell.aeat.co.uk by aeat.co.uk (8.7.1/AEAT-GW-1.3) id LAA06135; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 11:51:01 +0100 (BST) Received: from localhost.harwell.aeat.co.uk by jlines.harwell.aeat.co.uk with SMTP id LAA12711; 8.6.12/jl1.0; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 11:51:00 +0100 Message-Id: <199608131051.LAA12711@jlines.harwell.aeat.co.uk> X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.7 5/3/96 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: More on expired accounts In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 13 Aug 1996 09:41:27 BST." <199608130841.JAA23436@thor.cf.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 13 Aug 1996 11:50:57 +0100 From: John Lines Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Chris Cook wrote: > Previously Bill Silvert wrote - > > But neither he nor anyone else points out that one might inform the > > users from time to time that they can set their own mail forwarding, > > at least on many kinds of systems. I have found that many users, even > > computer-savvy summer students are unaware that when they leave here > > they can arrange to have all email forwarded to a new address > > Increasingly people who graduate or move to another institution do have e-mail > addresses to forward onto. User education is always the problem, the same as > trying to encourage folk to leave lists whilst they're away for an extended > period or when they leave. Agreed, it is a point I didn't touch on but now > it's raised, what about the further complications. Say for six months we > maintain a forwarding address for someone. Ideally in that time they would > have resubscribed or left existing lists plus told all of their friends their > new address. But we all know they don't do that. What would be useful would > be when Elvis@cardiff.ac.uk leaves, we repoint her address (didn't you know?) > to Elvis@new-place.co.uk but in such a way that any subsequent messages in > addition to forwarding, get an automatic response. Something along the lines > of > Your message to Elvis@cardiff.ac.uk has been forwarded to > Elvis@new-place.co.uk. Please update your address book for this > person. > RFC821 section 3.2. FORWARDING says: There are some cases where the destination information in the is incorrect, but the receiver-SMTP knows the correct destination. In such cases, one of the following replies should be used to allow the sender to contact the correct destination. 251 User not local; will forward to This reply indicates that the receiver-SMTP knows the user's mailbox is on another host and indicates the correct forward-path to use in the future. Note that either the host or user or both may be different. The receiver takes responsibility for delivering the message. 551 User not local; please try This reply indicates that the receiver-SMTP knows the user's mailbox is on another host and indicates the correct forward-path to use. Note that either the host or user or both may be different. The receiver refuses to accept mail for this user, and the sender must either redirect the mail according to the information provided or return an error response to the originating user. Unfortunately this part of the RFC does not seem to be widely implemented. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - John Lines Internet: john.lines@aeat.co.uk AEA Technology, 8 Harwell, Didcot Oxfordshire, OX11 0RA, U.K. Phone: +44 1235 432258 FAX: +44 1235 432339 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Please note that any views expressed here do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of AEA Technology. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 13 04:27:40 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id EAA28380 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 04:21:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail2.dircon.co.uk (mail2.dircon.co.uk [194.112.32.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id EAA28373 for ; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 04:20:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from diversity.org.uk (diversity.org.uk [194.112.46.199]) by mail2.dircon.co.uk (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id MAA21876 for ; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 12:13:45 +0100 (BST) From: Nigel Whitfield Subject: Re: More on expired accounts Organization: Digital Diversity Date: Tue, 13 Aug 1996 11:07:44 GMT Message-ID: References: <199608130841.JAA23436@thor.cf.ac.uk> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In article <199608130841.JAA23436@thor.cf.ac.uk>, Chris Cook wrote: >What would be useful would >be when Elvis@cardiff.ac.uk leaves, we repoint her address (didn't you know?) >to Elvis@new-place.co.uk but in such a way that any subsequent messages in >addition to forwarding, get an automatic response. That's just what I did when I left my last job; send a message to nigel@comp-buyer.co.uk and the first time you'll receive a note telling you who's taken over from me, and my new address. All the mail is automatically forwarded here. It's trivial to do with MMDF, and I guess can be done very easily with sendmail's .forward and vacation. Nigel. -- Nigel Whitfield nigel@diversity.org.uk Digital Diversity nigel@stonewall.demon.co.uk and uk-motss ***** All demon.co.uk sites are independently run internet hosts ***** From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 13 09:27:49 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id JAA23694 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 09:18:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ncar.UCAR.EDU (ncar.ucar.edu [192.52.106.6]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id JAA23671 for ; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 09:17:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199608131615.KAA13983@ncar.ucar.EDU> Received: by ncar.ucar.EDU (NCAR Local/ NCAR Central Post Office 03/11/93) id KAA13983; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 10:15:12 -0600 (MDT) Subject: Re: More on expired accounts To: scocc@thor.cf.ac.uk (Chris Cook) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 96 10:15:10 MDT Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <199608130841.JAA23436@thor.cf.ac.uk>; from "Chris Cook" at Aug 13, 96 9:41 am From: woods@ucar.edu (Greg Woods) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > any subsequent messages in > addition to forwarding, get an automatic response. Something along the lines > of > Your message to Elvis@cardiff.ac.uk has been forwarded to > Elvis@new-place.co.uk. Please update your address book for this > person. I think that's a good idea, as long as this reply is sent only once to each address (as is the case with the standard vacation(1) auto-reply program). As a list manager, I find it quite irritating to find 25 of these messages in my mailbox in the morning. --Greg From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 13 09:58:20 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id JAA26442 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 09:46:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huey.disney.com (huey.disney.com [204.128.192.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id JAA26423 for ; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 09:46:02 -0700 (PDT) From: sullivan@fa.disney.com Received: from dalsdb (dalsdb.fa.disney.com [139.104.212.4]) by huey.disney.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA27883 for ; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 09:41:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from oilspot.fa.disney.com by dalsdb with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #53) id m0uqMas-000004C; Tue, 13 Aug 96 09:45 PDT Received: from higgins.fa.disney.com by oilspot.fa.disney.com with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #53) id m0uqMas-0009D6C; Tue, 13 Aug 96 09:45 PDT Received: by higgins.fa.disney.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #53) id m0uqMbJ-0005HuC; Tue, 13 Aug 96 09:45 PDT Message-Id: <9608130945.ZM3183@higgins> Date: Tue, 13 Aug 1996 09:45:53 -0700 References: <199608130800.BAA17426@miles.greatcircle.com> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.0 26oct94 MediaMail) To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: bounced mail policy Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I used to send a message to the postmaster in charge of the address that bounced. However, my big mailing list is over 3000 members and it just got to be too much work. Here's what I do: "unknown user" messages, mark the address as inactive and note the date. I find these to be pretty accurate except for... a bunch of "unknown user" messages from the same site, wait a few days and see if the problem clears up. "transient" bounces, ignore "message could not be delivered for (3 or more) days", mark the address as inactive and note the date "message could not be delivered for (4 or so) hours", ignore "unknown host" bounces, see if the problem keeps up for a week, then mark the address as inactive and note the date. "quota" bounes, wait a few days and see if the problem clears up, then mark the address as inactive and note the date. - What I mean by "mark the address as inactive" is I basically comment out the address so I have some record of it (I then move these to a file at a later date). By noting the date, if someone with an inactive address writes and complains that they haven't gott mail, I can tell them why and when the problem happens. --- Michael Sullivan sullivan@fa.disney.com Walt Disney Feature Animation +1 818 560 8196 (voice) 500 S. Buena Vista St. +1 818 560 8290 (fax) Burbank, CA 91521-4870 From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 13 10:32:55 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id KAA28930 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 10:24:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from idyllmtn.com (ayla.idyllmtn.com [206.16.238.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id KAA28923 for ; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 10:23:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gates.idyllmtn.com by idyllmtn.com (8.6.8/Idyllmtn) id KAA19356; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 10:21:30 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19960813173517.0071ff1c@mail.idyllmtn.com> X-Sender: kynn@mail.idyllmtn.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 13 Aug 1996 10:35:17 -0700 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Kynn Bartlett Subject: Re: bounced mail policy Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Anything that I suspect might be a 'transient' bounce (that could clear up in a day or two, such as a full mailbox), I move to the -digest version of the list, if there is one. That way they won't necessarily miss much, and I'll get a -lot- fewer bounces clogging my mail until the problem is worked out. -- /\ /\ /\ /\ Kynn Bartlett / kynn@idyllmtn.com / \ / \/ \ / \ Idyll Mountain Internet / \ //\ /\ \ / \ '_| _` // \/ \__\ '_| _` Virtual Dog Show 3 opens on September 6th! From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 13 10:43:38 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id KAA28602 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 10:17:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sol.tins.net (sol.tins.net [205.173.230.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id KAA28571 for ; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 10:17:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from mgg@localhost) by sol.tins.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA20540; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 10:14:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 1996 10:14:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199608131714.KAA20540@sol.tins.net> From: Mark Galbraith To: John.Lines@aeat.co.uk CC: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-reply-to: <199608131051.LAA12711@jlines.harwell.aeat.co.uk> (message from John Lines on Tue, 13 Aug 1996 11:50:57 +0100) Subject: Re: More on expired accounts Organization: Triad InterNet Services X-Mailer: Emacs-19.32 X-Attribution: mgg Reply-to: mgg@sol.tins.net Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >>>>> "John" == John Lines writes: John> 551 User not local; please try John> This reply indicates that the receiver-SMTP knows the user's John> mailbox is on another host and indicates the correct John> forward-path to use. Note that either the host or user or John> both may be different. The receiver refuses to accept mail John> for this user, and the sender must either redirect the mail John> according to the information provided or return an error John> response to the originating user. John> Unfortunately this part of the RFC does not seem to be widely implemented. Doesn't the REDIRECT feature of sendmail do just this? I use that quite a bit when people leave the company. I've extended that feature a bit more so that if someone leaves without leaving a forward, I can pass the originator a message that the "User is no longer local; no forwarding address available". -- Mark Galbraith Engineer, Internet Services Triad Systems Corporation (PGP Fingerprint=1C B9 74 81 AD 5C 57 09 69 0B AC 09 7F 65 D6 F6) From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 13 11:43:19 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id LAA02298 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 11:30:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sunspot.tiac.net (sunspot.tiac.net [199.0.65.22]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id LAA02275 for ; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 11:29:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from stanr@localhost) by sunspot.tiac.net (8.6.12/8.6.6.Beta9) id OAA00964 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 14:29:43 -0400 From: Stan Ryckman Message-Id: <199608131829.OAA00964@sunspot.tiac.net> Subject: Re: More on expired accounts To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Tue, 13 Aug 1996 14:29:42 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <199608130841.JAA23436@thor.cf.ac.uk> from "Chris Cook" at Aug 13, 96 09:41:27 am Organization: Amber & Sneakers Fan Club X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Chris Cook wrote: [snip] > Increasingly people who graduate or move to another institution do have e-mail > addresses to forward onto. User education is always the problem, the same as > trying to encourage folk to leave lists whilst they're away for an extended > period or when they leave. Agreed, it is a point I didn't touch on but now > it's raised, what about the further complications. Say for six months we > maintain a forwarding address for someone. Ideally in that time they would > have resubscribed or left existing lists plus told all of their friends their > new address. But we all know they don't do that. There is a way to "encourage" that. One problem is that by default many mail readers don't show that the forwarding occurred at all. With UNIX systems, at least, get procmail and formail; then you could forward the mail but with a sufficiently-annoying reminder to the user (say, a screenful) prepended to the mail body. This would remind him to contact people and get them to change addresses, and would remind him that the forwarding is temporary only. It could also point out that forwarding delays him getting his mail. After your six months, there would be many fewer bounces when the forwarding ceases. Cheers, Stan Ryckman (stanr@tiac.net) From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 13 16:42:49 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id QAA01473 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 16:37:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.eskimo.com (mail.eskimo.com [204.122.16.4]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id QAA01451 for ; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 16:37:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eskimo.com (jimo@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA06474; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 16:37:01 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Osborn Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.5) id QAA16708; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 16:36:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 1996 16:36:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199608132336.QAA16708@eskimo.com> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, lynda@vaughan.fac.unbc.edu Subject: Re: bounced mail policy Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Lynda Williams asks: >What is the usual policy for dealing with addresses in a mailing list >which bounce mail? I used to sort majordomo error messges into all sorts of categories, and treat them all sepecially, much like several of the other respondants, paying closest attention to Unknown users. Now, with SmartList, I let the server auto-remove anyone who bounces four times in a row, and my workload is infinitely less. SmartList seems pretty good at ignoring the very-transient "couldn't deliver for four hours" kind of errors, and I've found that most of the ones that get auto-removed really have some problem. Sure, many of them come back in a few days, or a few weeks, but we're all saved the bandwidth while they get things straightened out. I still keep a log of Unknown user errors, because it's handy for from sites with, um, creative error messages, like Compuserve. These I usually have to delete by hand, as SmartList isn't confident enough to do its autodelete magic. If I know a subscriber well enough, I'll let him know his ISP is having trouble, by telephone if necessary. Usually he has a new ISP really soon. Cheers, jimo@eskimo.com From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 13 19:12:42 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id TAA13695 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 19:00:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.his.com (mail.his.com [205.177.25.9]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id SAA13656 for ; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 18:59:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.177.25.174] (brad.his.com [205.177.25.174]) by mail.his.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA12464; Tue, 13 Aug 1996 21:59:35 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199608130841.JAA23436@thor.cf.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 13 Aug 1996 21:45:29 -0400 To: Chris Cook , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: More on expired accounts Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 4:41 AM -0400 8/13/96, Chris Cook wrote: > Your message to Elvis@cardiff.ac.uk has been forwarded to > Elvis@new-place.co.uk. Please update your address book for this > person. Using version 8 sendmail (and FEATURE(redirect)), use: elvis: Elvis@new-place.co.uk, Elvis@new-place.co.uk.REDIRECT This will achieve exactly what you want. This should even be able to go into a .forward file, but I won't guarantee that. -- Brad Knowles, MIME/PGP: brad@his.com comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer finger brad@his.com for my PGP Public Keys and Geek Code The comp.mail.sendmail FAQ is at From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 14 05:13:01 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id FAA02291 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 05:10:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from use.usit.net (use.usit.net [199.1.48.3]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id FAA02271 for ; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 05:10:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from acme@localhost) by use.usit.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) id IAA25913; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 08:10:03 -0400 Date: Wed, 14 Aug 1996 08:10:02 -0400 (EDT) From: "Erich Schulman (KTN4CA) Team OS/2" To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: bounced mail policy In-Reply-To: <199608130800.BAA17426@miles.greatcircle.com> Message-ID: Organization: Rebel Alliance of Mobius MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Tue, 13 Aug 1996, List-Managers-Digest wrote: > Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 10:44:05 -0700 (PDT) > From: bill@celestial.com (Bill Campbell) > Subject: Re: bounced mail policy > For bad user accounts at delphi.com and ix.netcom.com, I just delete > them immediately since their policy is not to ``release information'' > about their customers so I don't waste my time. I used to be on Delphi, from 6/91-5/95. From my experience, an unknown user error from Delphi is likely correct and the subscription can be considered immediately-delteable. But Delphi can still bounce a lot of mail. All incoming mail may be bounced for several consecutive hours on a single day. I still remember Delphi's occasional announcement of going off the net for upgrades of hardware and/or software (often Sunday morning and usually before 9am Eastern time of any day), and mail would always bounce during this time. I once complained about being deleted from lists due to bounces, as did a few others. Their response was "you can always resubscribe". But a paying customer should not have to! Even if you catch up with the list archive (if there even is one), you can't take part in discussions while mail doesn't reach you and a thread may die before you can ever participate. Unless things have improved in the last 1.25 years, Delphi may well have found themselves site-banned from some mailing lists by now due to frequent bouncing. > We frequently see problems immediately after someone subscribes in > which our mailer can't talk to theirs for some reason or other > (timeouts, SMTP errors, etc.), and I immediately delete these since > there seems to be something basically wrong. Try to be a bit lenient if it's from delphi.com. It happens a lot with them. I wait about 2 days on these types of errors myself as I see them coming from 1 or more sites often but they tend to solve themselves within a day. > ------------------------------ > > Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 15:58:07 -0700 (PDT) > From: Cyndi Norman > Subject: bounced mail policy > For unknown users, I wait a few days to see if it resolves (about 75% do). > AOL unknown users are usually accurate but I give it one extra business day My aol.com problem is when AOL bounces mail from every aol.com subscriber on the list. This can last up to a whole day. Fortunately, I get only 1 bounce notice per message that lists all the aol.com addresses. I will ignore these notices unless the problem persists >1 day. Erich Schulman (KTN4CA) [Team OS/2] A net.freedom-fighter for Mobius! "Freedom Fighters are #1!" -- Sonic the Hedgehog StH JJ1 Son+ Sal++ Tal++++t Nic+i Rot+i Lup+ P++ Dopw $+++ E25 Ay68 Mail: acme@use.usit.net | WWW: temporarily unavailable From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 14 12:14:15 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id MAA12778 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 12:02:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay.rv.tis.com (gauntlet-1.trusted.com [204.254.155.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id MAA12680 for ; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 12:02:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by relay.rv.tis.com; id PAA15601; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 15:02:45 -0400 Received: from hilo.trusted.com(10.0.1.126) by gauntlet-1.trusted.com via smap (V3.1.1) id xma015596; Wed, 14 Aug 96 15:02:28 -0400 Received: by hilo.trusted.com (1.37.109.4/16.2) id AA24378; Wed, 14 Aug 96 15:04:25 -0400 Date: Wed, 14 Aug 96 15:04:25 -0400 From: Mark Sienkiewicz Message-Id: <9608141904.AA24378@hilo.trusted.com> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: bounced mail policy Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk List management is an official part of my job, but it is a very low priority. Here's what I do: Any address that bounces for any reason is dropped. I started doing this when I noticed that the overwhelming majority *never* start working again. A fair number of the addresses I get bounces from are not even on my list. If that is the case, I look for an address that *is* on the list that is in the same domain and has a similar user name. To make up an example, I'll get a bounce from jdoe@some.where.com and go find that John.Doe@where.com is on the list. If I find an address that looks like an exploder, I take the exploder off the list and send mail to the exploder and postmaster at that machine explaining that they should keep their exploders up to date. I usually get at least one bounce from trying to do this, but nobody has ever complained. I get a lot of subscribes from un-replyable addresses too. I just treat the bounce of the "welcome to the list" message and the following 5 bounces of the "you are already subscribed" messages like anything else-- I drop them from the list. Every couple weeks, I drop about 20 addresses. If I don't, my bounce volume grows linearly by about a .75 megabyte per week for each week since I cleaned the list. (i.e. first week .75 meg; second week 1.5 meg; third week 3 meg...) I think I'm most amazed by the number of *machines* that disappear. I expect users to go away, but I used to think mail hubs would hang around for a while... :) Mark Sienkiewicz Systems Administration TIS Network Security Products Group From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 14 22:42:58 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id WAA23234 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 22:40:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay.xlink.net (relay.xlink.net [193.141.40.5]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id WAA23217 for ; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 22:40:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 192.109.203.51 by relay.xlink.net id <108158-0@relay.xlink.net>; Thu, 15 Aug 1996 07:37:46 +0000 Received: by nemo.baltic.de (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0uqvff-000A90C; Thu, 15 Aug 96 08:12 MET DST Received: (from ft@localhost) by amber.baltic.de (8.6.12/8.6.9) id HAA01143 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 15 Aug 1996 07:40:55 +0200 Date: Thu, 15 Aug 1996 07:40:55 +0200 From: Frank Tegtmeyer Message-Id: <199608150540.HAA01143@amber.baltic.de> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: bounced mail policy Newsgroups: baltic.ml.list-managers Organization: private Linux site in Rostock, Germany Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > If I find an address that looks like an exploder, I take the > exploder off the list and send mail to the exploder and postmaster > at that machine explaining that they should keep their exploders > up to date. Exploders should never bounce to the original list (except when the whole host is down). Everybody who sets up an exploder should use some piece of software (like resend of Majordomo) that protects the original list from local failures. You could include a short explanation about this in your message to postmaster and exploder. I personally run only exploders but if I had a list I would remove every address that bounces for two days. Frank. -- homepage: http://www.ssi.de/people/fte/ From list-managers-owner Fri Aug 16 09:57:55 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id JAA07616 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 16 Aug 1996 09:50:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailbox.syr.edu (mailbox.syr.edu [128.230.1.5]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id JAA07609 for ; Fri, 16 Aug 1996 09:49:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spider.syr.edu (root@spider.syr.edu [128.230.4.42]) by mailbox.syr.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id MAA07850 for ; Fri, 16 Aug 1996 12:49:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from spider.syr.edu (jmwobus@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spider.syr.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id MAA05126 for ; Fri, 16 Aug 1996 12:49:34 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199608161649.MAA05126@spider.syr.edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: bounced mail policy In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 12 Aug 1996 10:17:28 PDT." Date: Fri, 16 Aug 1996 12:49:32 -0400 From: "John M. Wobus" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message you w rite: > >What is the usual policy for dealing with addresses in a mailing list >which bounce mail? Try to send a message by hand? Delete the address >from the list after a grace period? > >If this is a FAQ, please give directions to the FAQ and accept my >appologies. > >---------------------------------------- >Lynda Williams lynda@vaughan.fac.unbc.edu >University of Northern B.C. I use LISTSERV's automatic bounce-handling, set so that any address that bounces two weekly digests in a row gets removed. For the stuff that LISTSERV doesn't handle: (1) If it is causing lots of bounce messages (e.g. 10 within a week), I remove it. (2) If it is an individual's address, and I receive a second bounce message that implies the address no longer exists, I remove it. (3) Otherwise, I remove it after a month of continual bouncing. Most people on my mailing list get weekly digests, which is the default. If more people got individual messages, I'd be adapting the policy. -John Wobus From list-managers-owner Fri Aug 16 10:42:55 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id KAA14156 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 16 Aug 1996 10:40:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ig.cs.utk.edu (IG.CS.UTK.EDU [128.169.94.149]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id KAA14091 for ; Fri, 16 Aug 1996 10:40:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost by ig.cs.utk.edu with SMTP (8.6.10/2.8c-UTK) id NAA04766; Fri, 16 Aug 1996 13:39:56 -0400 Message-Id: <199608161739.NAA04766@ig.cs.utk.edu> X-URI: http://www.cs.utk.edu/~moore/ To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: draft requirements for IETF mailing lists cc: moore@cs.utk.edu From: Keith Moore Date: Fri, 16 Aug 1996 13:39:55 -0400 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I'm soliciting comments on an internet-draft that I've written, which contains possible requirements for running mailing lists used by IETF. (Note that these are NOT intended as requirements for mailing lists in general.) the I-D is in ftp://ds.internic.net/internet-drafts/draft-moore-maillist-req-00.txt (or at other internet-drafts repositories) thanks, Keith From list-managers-owner Fri Aug 16 21:44:15 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id VAA14394 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 16 Aug 1996 21:35:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from apc.net (apc.net [206.135.15.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id VAA14387 for ; Fri, 16 Aug 1996 21:35:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bobs.apc.net by apc.net with SMTP (IPAD 1.1e) id 3631600 ; Fri, 16 Aug 96 21:29:43 UTC Message-ID: <32154720.4BC4@apc.net> Date: Fri, 16 Aug 1996 21:14:24 -0700 From: Bob X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Keith Moore CC: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: draft requirements for IETF mailing lists References: <199608161739.NAA04766@ig.cs.utk.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Keith Moore wrote: > > I'm soliciting comments on an internet-draft that I've written, which > contains possible requirements for running mailing lists used by IETF. > (Note that these are NOT intended as requirements for mailing lists > in general.) > > the I-D is in > > ftp://ds.internic.net/internet-drafts/draft-moore-maillist-req-00.txt > > (or at other internet-drafts repositories) > > thanks, > > Keithwill somebody unsubscribe me, bobs@apc.net, from this newsgroup? From list-managers-owner Sat Aug 17 15:13:05 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id OAA06092 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 17 Aug 1996 14:59:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from netcomsv.netcom.com (uucp4.netcom.com [163.179.3.4]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id OAA06084 for ; Sat, 17 Aug 1996 14:59:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from duke.sagarmatha.com by netcomsv.netcom.com with UUCP (8.6.12/SMI-4.1) id OAA03329; Sat, 17 Aug 1996 14:53:58 -0700 Received: by duke (Smail3.1.28.1 #64) id m0ursqA-000gczC; Sat, 17 Aug 96 14:23 PDT Message-Id: From: james@sagarmatha.com (James C. Armstrong) Subject: CompuServe Mail and lists errors (fwd) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.com Date: Sat, 17 Aug 1996 14:23:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk An official spokesman from Compuserve has commented on the list aggrevations we've all experienced: According to unnamed sources, Tom Haney is alleged to have written => => On behalf of CompuServe, I would like to apologize for the problems with mailing => lists which you have experienced. Engineers are currently working to change the => way in which errors are bounced to a list, following standard conventions and => RFCs. This update to the "new" CompuServe Mail system should be incorporated => soon. There are still some mailboxes on the "old" CompuServe Mail which, for => technical reasons, will continue to generate delivery reports as they always => have. Our goal for the next few months is to move most all our mailboxes to the => new CompuServe Mail system. => => A confused sysop stated that CompuServe discouraged mailing lists. This is not => true. => => Let me know if you have any questions. We are aware of the inconvenience and we => are working to put a change in place quickly. Sorry for the delayed response. => => Tom Haney => CompuServe Mail I hope something real comes of this. -- James C. Armstrong, Jr. | It's time to taste what you most fear james@sagarmatha.com (home) | Right Guard will not help you here. | Brace yourself, my dear! | It's a holiday in Cambodia! From list-managers-owner Sun Aug 18 08:28:01 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id IAA23782 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 18 Aug 1996 08:15:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dnai.com (dnai.com [140.174.162.28]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id IAA23757 for ; Sun, 18 Aug 1996 08:15:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dynamic-209.dnai.com (dynamic-209.dnai.com [140.174.162.209]) by dnai.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA15234 for ; Sun, 18 Aug 1996 08:15:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199608181515.IAA15234@dnai.com> X-Sender: offshore@dnai.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 2.0.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 18 Aug 1996 08:10:31 -0700 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: offshore@dnai.com (The Global Group) Subject: Bounced Messages---A Proposal! Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Dear Members, I manually maintain a mailing list of around 2,500 subscribers to OFFSHORE, an eJournal. It is published around every two weeks. I suffer from all the complaints we have agonized over on this list over the performance of list servers and ISPs. Our problem is that is that there is no standard format in bounced message reports. I have to hunt for the nature of the problem---host unknown, user unknown, mail box full, etc., in a different part of the message. I like the AOL bounced report---it is very clear and definitive---and the most prompt reporting on the Internet, but tooooooo long (see below). I'm getting bouce messages being saved on my ISP as the list goes out. I would like to propose standards we adopt and IMPOSE STANDARDS UPON THE NET COMMUNITY for bounced messages to be uniformly adopted by the Net community---ISPs and list servers (in the generic sense): 1. Every bounced message must contain the email address of the intended receipient. When I send out BCC mail, it doesn't always happen---thus I can't fix the problem and it continues. No attachments are allowed in bounced reports. 2. Every bounced message contain the three number code (it this a current standard?, XXX for user unknown, YYY for host unknown, ZZZ for mail box full, etc., so that I don't need to search the whole bounced messgage---such as is used by some list servers and ISPs. 3. As an option, only part of the message is bounced back, not the whole thing wasting tremendous bandwidth. To achieve this, the sender could (optional) include in the subject line a code, for example: "~+~". ~+~ means send back only the first 25 lines. Example of the new subject line style: Subject: ~+~ OFFSHORE, an eJournal [tm], V.6, #15 4. This list would adopt the "Code" and make in mandatory upon all lists to use or bounce their mail after a certain established date. Collectively we have power. Let's use it to better the system, make our job easier and not just complain among ourselves. Any comments. Best regards, Arnie... Sincerely, Arnold L. Cornez, J.D., Author "The Offshore Money Book": a Comprehensive Guide for Reluctant Americans; publisher: International Publishing Corp., in your bookstore or call: 1-800-488-4149; 1-312-943-7354, fax: 312-642-0679, 6" X 9", 282 pages, paper back, (c) 1996, $29.95 + S&H, ISBN: 0-9422641-72-8 From list-managers-owner Sun Aug 18 13:43:02 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id NAA06806 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 18 Aug 1996 13:33:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from iswonk.intellex.com (intellex.net [205.186.137.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id NAA06769 for ; Sun, 18 Aug 1996 13:33:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from glr10 (tcp76.intellex.net [205.186.137.76]) by iswonk.intellex.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) with SMTP id PAA16156 for ; Sun, 18 Aug 1996 15:33:26 -0500 Date: Sun, 18 Aug 1996 15:33:26 -0500 Message-Id: <199608182033.PAA16156@iswonk.intellex.com> X-Sender: glrice@intellex.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Gary Rice Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk From list-managers-owner Sun Aug 18 20:58:10 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id UAA29628 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 18 Aug 1996 20:46:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id UAA29555 for ; Sun, 18 Aug 1996 20:46:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mne.ifi.uio.no (1232@mne.ifi.uio.no [129.240.70.5]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id ; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 05:46:48 +0200 From: Kjetil Torgrim Homme Received: (from kjetilho@localhost) by mne.ifi.uio.no ; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 05:46:46 +0200 Date: Mon, 19 Aug 1996 05:46:46 +0200 Message-Id: <199608190346.4002.mne.ifi.uio.no@ifi.uio.no> To: ft@amber.baltic.de CC: list-managers@greatcircle.com In-reply-to: <199608150540.HAA01143@amber.baltic.de> (message from Frank Tegtmeyer on Thu, 15 Aug 1996 07:40:55 +0200) Subject: Re: bounced mail policy Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk [Frank Tegtmeyer] | Exploders should never bounce to the original list (except when | the whole host is down). Everybody who sets up an exploder should | use some piece of software (like resend of Majordomo) that | protects the original list from local failures. Agreed, but resend is overkill, it suffices to add an owner-exploder alias (with sendmail, that is). Unfortunately, Sendmail honours the Errors-To header in addition to reporting to the owner. Kjetil T. From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 19 01:43:43 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id BAA16172 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 01:32:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sol.utu.fi (sol.utu.fi [130.232.1.30]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id BAA16118 for ; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 01:32:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by utu.fi id <12698-22994>; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 11:32:13 +0300 Subject: Re: Bounced Messages---A Proposal! From: Matti Aarnio To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Mon, 19 Aug 1996 11:32:00 +0300 (EET DST) In-Reply-To: <199608190800.BAA14150@miles.greatcircle.com> from "List-Managers-Digest" at Aug 19, 96 01:00:39 am MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: <96Aug19.113213+0300_eet_dst.12698-22994+480@utu.fi> Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > Dear Members, > > I manually maintain a mailing list of around 2,500 subscribers to OFFSHORE, > an eJournal. It is published around every two weeks. I suffer from all the > complaints we have agonized over on this list over the performance of list > servers and ISPs. > > Our problem is that is that there is no standard format in bounced message > reports. I have to hunt for the nature of the problem---host unknown, user > unknown, mail box full, etc., in a different part of the message. ... I suggest you start reading some new RFCs. The Internet Engineering Technical Formum has members that are well aware of the problem. Below is the set of references to them, RFC 1892, and 1894 are the ones you most likely should start with. And mind you, those are created for AUTOMATED processing. 1891 SMTP Service Extension for Delivery Status Notifications. K. Moore. January 1996. (Format: TXT=65192 bytes) 1892 The Multipart/Report Content Type for the Reporting of Mail System Administrative Messages. G. Vaudreuil. January 1996. (Format: TXT=7800 bytes) 1893 Enhanced Mail System Status Codes. G. Vaudreuil. January 1996. (Format: TXT=28218 bytes) 1894 An Extensible Message Format for Delivery Status Notifications. K. Moore & G. Vaudreuil. January 1996. (Format: TXT=77462 bytes) > Any comments. > > Best regards, > Arnie... > Sincerely, > Arnold L. Cornez, J.D., Author "The Offshore Money Book": a Comprehensive /Matti Aarnio From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 19 10:58:13 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id KAA25002 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 10:29:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from prawn.fishy.net (flounder.fishy.net [206.156.56.34]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id KAA24948; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 10:28:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sturgeon.fishy.net (sturgeon.fishy.net [172.16.1.3]) by prawn.fishy.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA37146; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 13:23:46 -0400 Received: (from bonnie@localhost) by sturgeon.fishy.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) id NAA34586; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 13:23:46 -0400 From: Bonnie Message-Id: <199608191723.NAA34586@sturgeon.fishy.net> Subject: Majordomo Acknowledgements -- which list? To: majordomo-owners@greatcircle.com, list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Mon, 19 Aug 1996 13:23:45 -0400 (EDT) Cc: majordomo-owner@listserv.prodigy.com X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk More information needed! There was the following suggestion on the list-managers list, I'm sending my comment to both that list and majordomo-owners@greatcircle.com. >1. Every bounced message must contain the email address of the intended >receipient. When I send out BCC mail, it doesn't always happen---thus I >can't fix the problem and it continues. No attachments are allowed in >bounced reports. In the same vein, I'd like to ask how to tell from Majordomo's response which list an admin acknowledgement pertains to (see example below). In order to survive the bouncing, the name of the list which the user subscribes to should be in the body of the message, instead of a simple > >>>> subscribe > Succeeded. I would like to be able to tell what list to look for the subscriber's address, without resorting to the Majordomo and mail log files (not all majordomo-owners here will have easy access to those files). As far as I know, I am not the owner of any active list at our site, but I am a majordomo owner. I'm not sure whether the original request came into "majordomo@listserv.prodigy.com" or "listname-request@listserv.prodigy.com," although we encourage the latter. I don't think a copy of this ever got to the list's owner. This problem hasn't been at the top of my priority list (although we get dozens per day), because I know the first real message sent out on the list to this address _will_ bounce back to the list owner. I'd just like to catch it before then. Why isn't any reference made to listname-owner or listname-request? Any advice? For the list, I _am_ adding an "Errors-to:" (yes, shame on me for header munging), but that wouldn't get used for admin requests, I assume. Any help is appreciated, Bonnie Scott Prodigy Services Corp. majordomo-owner@listserv.prodigy.com (goes to several people) Forwarded message: > From root Mon Aug 19 12:20:14 1996 > From: POSTMASTER@USA.NET > Date: Mon, 19 Aug 1996 10:20:42 -0600 (MDT) > Message-Id: <199608191620.KAA21849@netaddress.usa.net> > To: eduggan@USA.NET > Subject: Unknown recipient > > The following mail has been returned because the intended recipient is > not known in our postoffice. Please confirm that you intended for this > mail to be delivered to the following address: > > eduggan@usa.net > > If the above address is correct you may wish to contact the recipient > to find out the status of their service. If the recipient had canceled > within the last 6 months you would have received a different notice. > > --------RETURNED MAIL FOLLOWS-------- > Received: from unknown (127.0.0.1) by netaddress.usa.net via smtp-relay (1.0) > id smtp-LoB8L693; Mon Aug 19 10:20:35 1996 > Received: from listserv.prodigy.com (listserv.prodigy.com [198.83.19.40]) by pimaia2y.prodigy.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) with ESMTP id MAA39516 for ; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 12:07:46 -0400 > Received: (from majordom@localhost) by listserv.prodigy.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA20842; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 12:08:38 -0400 > Date: Mon, 19 Aug 1996 12:08:38 -0400 > Message-Id: <199608191608.MAA20842@listserv.prodigy.com> > To: eduggan@usa.net > From: majordomo@listserv.prodigy.com > Subject: Majordomo results > Reply-To: majordomo@listserv.prodigy.com > > -- > > >>>> subscribe > Succeeded. > >>>> > >>>> > --------END OF RETURNED MAIL-------- > From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 19 13:01:03 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id MAA12709 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 12:44:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id MAA12528; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 12:43:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from tibbs@localhost) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) id OAA09175; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 14:43:04 -0500 (CDT) To: Bonnie Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, majordomo-workers@GreatCircle.COM, majordomo-owner@listserv.prodigy.com Subject: Re: Majordomo Acknowledgements -- which list? References: <199608191723.NAA34586@sturgeon.fishy.net> From: Jason L Tibbitts III Date: 19 Aug 1996 14:43:04 -0500 In-Reply-To: Bonnie's message of Mon, 19 Aug 1996 13:23:45 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Lines: 39 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.2.39/Emacs 19.30 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >>>>> "B" == Bonnie writes: B> There was the following suggestion on the list-managers list, I'm B> sending my comment to both that list and B> majordomo-owners@greatcircle.com. I don't think that there is such a list as majordomo-owners@greatcircle.com. Perhaps you meant majordomo-users? If you want to discuss technical solutions to your problem, please reply to majordomo-workers@greatcircle.com. In any case, this is solely a Majordomo issue and is completely off-topic for list-managers. B> In the same vein, I'd like to ask how to tell from Majordomo's response B> which list an admin acknowledgement pertains to (see example below). B> In order to survive the bouncing, the name of the list which the user B> subscribes to should be in the body of the message, instead of a simple >> >>>> subscribe Succeeded. If you're running majordomo on the -request address you'll probably get this. I'll see if I can't whip up a solution and get it into 1.94. B> I'm not sure whether the original request came into B> "majordomo@listserv.prodigy.com" or B> "listname-request@listserv.prodigy.com," although we encourage the B> latter. If the request wen to majordomo it would have been an error because the subscribe command requires a list name. The solution to allowing bad addresses onto your lists is confirmed subscribes. This also solves the problem of spam and forged subscriptions. Unfortunately you might not be able to run it because it requires the people on the other end to do just a little more work. -- Jason L. Tibbitts III - tibbs@uh.edu - 713/743-8684 - 221SR1 System Manager: University of Houston High Performance Computing Center 1994 PC800 "Kuroneko" DoD# 1723 From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 19 19:43:22 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id TAA12989 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 19:29:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.his.com (mail.his.com [205.177.25.9]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id TAA12973 for ; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 19:29:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.177.25.174] (brad.his.com [205.177.25.174]) by mail.his.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA07352; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 22:29:32 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199608181515.IAA15234@dnai.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 19 Aug 1996 22:23:42 -0400 To: offshore@dnai.com (The Global Group), List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: Bounced Messages---A Proposal! Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 11:10 AM -0400 8/18/1996, The Global Group wrote: >Our problem is that is that there is no standard format in bounced message >reports. I have to hunt for the nature of the problem---host unknown, user >unknown, mail box full, etc., in a different part of the message. Sure there is. It's called a Delivery Status Notification, and is a standards-track RFC. We'll be supporting it on AOL in the fairly near future (probably still at least a few months away, though). -- Brad Knowles, MIME/PGP: brad@his.com comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer finger brad@his.com for my PGP Public Keys and Geek Code The comp.mail.sendmail FAQ is at From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 19 19:46:27 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id TAA13004 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 19:29:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.his.com (mail.his.com [205.177.25.9]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id TAA12991 for ; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 19:29:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.177.25.174] (brad.his.com [205.177.25.174]) by mail.his.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA07365; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 22:29:37 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199608190346.4002.mne.ifi.uio.no@ifi.uio.no> References: <199608150540.HAA01143@amber.baltic.de> (message from Frank Tegtmeyer on Thu, 15 Aug 1996 07:40:55 +0200) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 19 Aug 1996 22:25:33 -0400 To: Kjetil Torgrim Homme , ft@amber.baltic.de From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: bounced mail policy Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 11:46 PM -0400 8/18/1996, Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote: >[Frank Tegtmeyer] > >| Exploders should never bounce to the original list (except when >| the whole host is down). Everybody who sets up an exploder should >| use some piece of software (like resend of Majordomo) that >| protects the original list from local failures. > >Agreed, but resend is overkill, it suffices to add an owner-exploder >alias (with sendmail, that is). Unfortunately, Sendmail honours the >Errors-To header in addition to reporting to the owner. Errors-To has been deprecated for a long time, and comes configured by default off. You have to work at it to turn it back on, and those that do, well, I wish I could say that they get what they deserve. Unfortunately, the problem is that they cause problems for others. If everyone stopped using Errors-to, and everyone stopped supporting it, there wouldn't be a problem. -- Brad Knowles, MIME/PGP: brad@his.com comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer finger brad@his.com for my PGP Public Keys and Geek Code The comp.mail.sendmail FAQ is at From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 19 21:43:06 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id VAA19789 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 21:37:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from prawn.fishy.net (flounder.fishy.net [206.156.56.34]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id VAA19782 for ; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 21:36:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sturgeon.fishy.net (sturgeon.fishy.net [172.16.1.3]) by prawn.fishy.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id AAA14278; Tue, 20 Aug 1996 00:31:58 -0400 Received: (from bonnie@localhost) by sturgeon.fishy.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) id AAA11208; Tue, 20 Aug 1996 00:32:00 -0400 From: Bonnie Message-Id: <199608200432.AAA11208@sturgeon.fishy.net> Subject: ALERT: False subscriptions for U Texas addresses To: listowners@listserv.prodigy.com, list-managers@greatcircle.com, majordomo-owner@listserv.prodigy.com Date: Tue, 20 Aug 1996 00:31:59 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk To all: The following five addresses were found to have been subscribed to all public lists that we host. We have deleted the addresses from our lists and are contacting the victims. Please investigate any subscription requests for University of Texas addresses. Jim Chen Henry Yoshida Randall Garey Eric Edwards Ching-Jen Chung Bonnie Scott Majordomo Owner Prodigy Services Corp. From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 20 14:28:45 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id OAA13060 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 20 Aug 1996 14:23:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shoreside.com (shoreside.com [206.40.34.81]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id OAA13038 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 1996 14:22:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from jlick@localhost) by shoreside.com (8.7.3/8.7.3) id OAA04818; Tue, 20 Aug 1996 14:22:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 1996 14:22:03 -0700 (PDT) From: James Lick To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: worldcom.com: non-compliant Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I've found another site which like compuserve does not follow the Internet standards for where to bounce mail. The site is worldcom.com and it seems to handle mail delivery for several small sites. I've just started to reject mail with worldcom.com in the headers and have notified them that such is taking place. Other sites may want to take similiar action, especially if using Reply-To: listname. -- James Lick -- jlick@drivel.com -- http://drivel.com/jlick/ -- From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 20 15:14:41 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id PAA18955 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 20 Aug 1996 15:12:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay1.shore.net (relay1.shore.net [192.233.85.129]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id PAA18897 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 1996 15:11:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smoe.org (smoe.org [204.167.97.154]) by relay1.shore.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id SAA21452 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 1996 18:12:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: by smoe.org (4.1/SMI-4.1-hack1) id AA19610; Tue, 20 Aug 96 18:12:06 EDT From: jeffw@smoe.org (Jeff Wasilko) Message-Id: <9608202212.AA19610@smoe.org> Subject: Need 'auto-responder' script To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Tue, 20 Aug 1996 18:12:06 -0400 (EDT) Organization: Jeff's Personal System X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I need a script to handle a 'auto-responder' mailbox (info mailbox)... Can someone point me in the right direction? Thanks! Jeff From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 21 12:58:12 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id MAA25622 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 21 Aug 1996 12:54:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mitchell.cap.af.mil (mitchell.cap.af.mil [132.60.58.11]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id MAA25614 for ; Wed, 21 Aug 1996 12:54:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (cmilam@localhost) by mitchell.cap.af.mil (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA13279 for ; Wed, 21 Aug 1996 14:54:23 -0500 Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 14:54:23 -0500 (CDT) From: "Milam, Charles R. 1LT CAP" To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Another suspicious subscriber Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Anyone had this suspicious subscriber show up on their lists in the past two days? youngman@juno.com (Young Man, Inc.) --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1LT Chuck Milam, CAP (334) 953-4271 Programmer/Analyst, Information Systems DSN: 493-4271 USAF Auxiliary-CAP National Headquarters cmilam@cap.af.mil From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 21 13:17:49 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id NAA26564 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 21 Aug 1996 13:09:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from park.interport.net (park.interport.net [199.184.165.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id NAA26537 for ; Wed, 21 Aug 1996 13:09:15 -0700 (PDT) From: kieran@interport.net Received: from interport.net (kieran@madison.nfs.interport.net [205.161.144.1]) by park.interport.net (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA24099; Wed, 21 Aug 1996 16:09:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (kieran@localhost) by interport.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA08754; Wed, 21 Aug 1996 16:09:14 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 16:09:14 -0400 (EDT) To: "Milam, Charles R. 1LT CAP" cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Another suspicious subscriber 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 Wed, 21 Aug 1996, Milam, Charles R. 1LT CAP wrote: > > Anyone had this suspicious subscriber show up on their lists in the past > two days? > > youngman@juno.com (Young Man, Inc.) Oh yes, he's recognized. He's even got a whole FAQ about him: http://www.seas.ucla.edu/~tcyang/html/Kyle_faq.html I suggest you remove him immediately, and do it quietly in a way that will not alert him he's been removed. From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 21 18:13:13 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id SAA17978 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 21 Aug 1996 18:10:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from angus.mystery.com (angus.mystery.com [198.202.235.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id SAA17964 for ; Wed, 21 Aug 1996 18:10:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by angus.mystery.com (Smail3.1.29.1 #3) id m0utOHu-000GzIC; Wed, 21 Aug 96 21:10 EDT Message-Id: From: gabe@angus.mystery.com (Gabe Helou) Subject: Re: Need 'auto-responder' script To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 21:10:22 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <199608210800.BAA03990@miles.greatcircle.com> from "List-Managers-Digest" at Aug 21, 96 01:00:29 am Reply-To: gabe@mystery.com X-URL: http://www.mystery.com/~gabe/ X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk ... and then Jeff Wasilko says: } I need a script to handle a 'auto-responder' mailbox (info mailbox)... Check out canned_reply. If you have trouble finding it, you can write to canned_reply@angus.mystery.com and a copy will be sent automatically. It's written in Perl and is fairly short. -- --- -- - - - - - - - - From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 22 19:58:20 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id TAA19592 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 22 Aug 1996 19:58:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.his.com (mail.his.com [205.177.25.9]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id TAA19585 for ; Thu, 22 Aug 1996 19:58:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.177.25.174] (brad.his.com [205.177.25.174]) by mail.his.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA03998; Thu, 22 Aug 1996 22:58:01 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <9608202212.AA19610@smoe.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 22 Aug 1996 22:43:57 -0400 To: jeffw@smoe.org (Jeff Wasilko), List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: Need 'auto-responder' script Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 6:12 PM -0400 8/20/1996, Jeff Wasilko wrote: >I need a script to handle a 'auto-responder' mailbox (info mailbox)... > >Can someone point me in the right direction? Try procmail. See . -- Brad Knowles, MIME/PGP: brad@his.com comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer finger brad@his.com for my PGP Public Keys and Geek Code The comp.mail.sendmail FAQ is at From list-managers-owner Fri Aug 23 07:58:56 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id HAA01598 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 23 Aug 1996 07:49:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.oulu.fi (lists.oulu.fi [130.231.241.85]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id HAA01591 for ; Fri, 23 Aug 1996 07:49:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from mhotti@localhost) by lists.oulu.fi (8.6.12/8.6.9) id RAA07457 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Fri, 23 Aug 1996 17:52:01 +0300 Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 17:52:01 +0300 From: Marko Hotti Message-Id: <199608231452.RAA07457@lists.oulu.fi> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: removal of 'phoenix.oulu.fi' in your mailing lists Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Fellow listmanagers and administrators, This may not be the best forum for this kind of request but here it goes. One of the oldest UNIX hosts at the University of Oulu (phoenix.oulu.fi) with over 10,000 student accounts is about to be seized of it's existance. All the students were informed of this well in advance but there are still a big amount of subscriptions to this server with email addresses looking like . All email to phoenix will be replied to using an autoreplier stating that students' email addresses are in the form from now on. Judging by the vast amount of bounced email our postmaster receives the addresses have not been changed. In my opinion the most effective way of handling this is to completely remove any email address to 'phoenix.oulu.fi'. There are quite a big amount of closed/expired accounts as well so replacing 'phoenix' for 'raita' is not a good idea. In general, when a host is taken down, what is the best method to handle these massive mailing list subscriptions?? With regards, Marko Hotti System Administrator of 'lists.oulu.fi' Computing Center, University of Oulu, FINLAND Email: From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 26 08:44:37 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id IAA15269 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 08:18:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from uu9.psi.com (uu9.psi.com [38.145.107.9]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id IAA15219 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 08:17:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dkmc.UUCP by uu9.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) via UUCP; id AA19349 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 96 11:03:49 -0400 Date: Mon, 26 Aug 96 10:55:36 EDT From: bbrown@dkmc.org (Bob Brown) Subject: Heads Up - dis.org Message-Id: <9608261055.0.UUL1.3#25605@dkmc.org> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I administer three domains. All three have received "lists" commands to majordomo and listserv from addresses at 'dis.org' within the past 30 hours. This may be completely innocent, but I doubt it; the headers were either lamely forged, or just lame, e.g. loca1host, merde.dis.org, etc. Heads up out there! --Bob From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 26 09:13:57 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id IAA19184 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 08:59:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eri.erinet.com (eri.erinet.com [198.6.245.100]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id IAA19106 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 08:59:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by eri.erinet.com (8.6.12/EriNet) id LAA26776; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 11:59:14 -0400 From: timothy@erinet.com (Tim Finkenstadt) Message-Id: <199608261559.LAA26776@eri.erinet.com> Subject: Re: Heads Up - dis.org To: bbrown@dkmc.org (Bob Brown) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 11:59:13 -0400 (EDT) Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: <9608261055.0.UUL1.3#25605@dkmc.org> from "Bob Brown" at Aug 26, 96 10:55:36 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] Content-Type: text Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > I administer three domains. All three have received "lists" commands to > majordomo and listserv from addresses at 'dis.org' within the past 30 > hours. > > This may be completely innocent, but I doubt it; the headers were either > lamely forged, or just lame, e.g. loca1host, merde.dis.org, etc. > > Heads up out there! > --Bob I've received upwards of 15 of these attempts already. Just adding to confirmation and it's just not you, Bob. :) From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 26 10:58:56 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id KAA25477 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 10:54:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay7.UU.NET (relay7.UU.NET [192.48.96.17]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id KAA25470 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 10:54:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay1.shore.net by relay7.UU.NET with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: relay1.shore.net [192.233.85.129]) id QQbelr08794; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 13:54:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smoe.org (smoe.org [204.167.97.154]) by relay1.shore.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA07714 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 13:51:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: by smoe.org (4.1/SMI-4.1-hack1) id AA19332; Mon, 26 Aug 96 13:51:42 EDT From: jeffw@smoe.org (Jeff Wasilko) Message-Id: <9608261751.AA19332@smoe.org> Subject: Potential spam from dis.org (fwd) To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 13:51:42 -0400 (EDT) Organization: Jeff's Personal System X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Guess . writes: > From voy@merde.dis.org Mon Aug 26 13:47:13 1996 > Message-Id: <199608261746.KAA27939@merde.dis.org> > To: jeffw@smoe.org > Cc: postmaster@dis.org > Subject: Potential spam from dis.org > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > Content-Id: <27884.841081472.1@merde.dis.org> > Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 10:44:32 -0700 > From: "Guess ." > > >------- Forwarded Message > > > >From: jeffw@smoe.org (Jeff Wasilko) > >Message-Id: <9608261725.AA19265@smoe.org> > >Subject: Potential spam from dis.org? > > > > > >There seems to be something unusal going on at your domain...many > >mailing list servers are getting hit with 'lists' command, which > >in the past has been a prelude to a large spam. > > > >You might want to post a note of explanation to the list-managers > >list. > > > >------- End of Forwarded Message > > > > sorry to offend you, I am a High School sophmore and am writing a paper > for class on internet growth and am counting the number of mailing lists > on the internet and I plan to use this to show how big it is even with out > the world wide web. > > +Vance Oakley > > From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 26 12:08:07 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id LAA26849 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 11:28:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gw.lbcc.cc.or.us ([204.214.120.14]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id LAA26810 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 11:27:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from LB1-Message_Server by gw.lbcc.cc.or.us with Novell_GroupWise; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 11:28:41 -0800 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 11:26:13 -0800 From: Dan Sugalski To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: DIS.ORG spreads out Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk The mailing list I run here (a tiny one) just got hit with a list request from a VOY@WORST.COM. Luckily for me, I'm not running majordomo, so the requests bounced. WORST.COM's apparently getting name service from DIS.ORG, and the bounced list request was from dis.org. From the mail message, it almost looks like this moron set up a majordomo list to spam other lists with. Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dan Sugalski "Conform, go mad, Programmer Dude or become an artist" Linn-Benton Community College sugalsd@gw.lbcc.cc.or.us From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 26 12:27:50 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id MAA28327 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 12:07:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay7.UU.NET (relay7.UU.NET [192.48.96.17]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id MAA28318 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 12:07:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mv.mv.com by relay7.UU.NET with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mv.mv.com [192.80.84.1]) id QQbelo21289; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 13:09:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: (mem@localhost) by mv.mv.com (8.7.5/mem-940616) id NAA02341 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 13:07:10 -0400 (EDT) From: "Mark E. Mallett" Message-Id: <199608261707.NAA02341@mv.mv.com> Subject: Re: Heads Up - dis.org To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 13:07:10 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <199608261559.LAA26776@eri.erinet.com> from "Tim Finkenstadt" at Aug 26, 96 11:59:13 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > > I administer three domains. All three have received "lists" commands to > > majordomo and listserv from addresses at 'dis.org' within the past 30 > > hours. > > > > This may be completely innocent, but I doubt it; the headers were either > > lamely forged, or just lame, e.g. loca1host, merde.dis.org, etc. > > > > Heads up out there! > > --Bob > > I've received upwards of 15 of these attempts already. > > Just adding to confirmation and it's just not you, Bob. :) Yep, we got a "lists" command from dis.org also. But since we have that command disabled, it didn't tell them anything :-) -mm- From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 26 12:28:11 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id MAA28171 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 12:03:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay1.UU.NET (relay1.UU.NET [192.48.96.5]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id MAA28153 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 12:03:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay1.shore.net by relay1.UU.NET with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: relay1.shore.net [192.233.85.129]) id QQbelo29472; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 13:10:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smoe.org (smoe.org [204.167.97.154]) by relay1.shore.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA29498; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 13:07:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: by smoe.org (4.1/SMI-4.1-hack1) id AA19202; Mon, 26 Aug 96 13:07:06 EDT From: jeffw@smoe.org (Jeff Wasilko) Message-Id: <9608261707.AA19202@smoe.org> Subject: Re: Heads Up - dis.org To: timothy@erinet.com (Tim Finkenstadt) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 13:07:05 -0400 (EDT) Cc: bbrown@dkmc.org, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <199608261559.LAA26776@eri.erinet.com> from "Tim Finkenstadt" at Aug 26, 96 11:59:13 am Organization: Jeff's Personal System X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Tim Finkenstadt writes: > > > I administer three domains. All three have received "lists" commands to > > majordomo and listserv from addresses at 'dis.org' within the past 30 > > hours. > I've received upwards of 15 of these attempts already. > > Just adding to confirmation and it's just not you, Bob. :) At the risk of doing a 'me too', I rec'd a request as well: jane% whichlog dis.org /usr/local/bin/majordomo/Log:Aug 25 21:11:25 jane majordomo[2885] {voy@dis.org} lists From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 26 12:46:25 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id MAA29382 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 12:41:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay1.UU.NET (relay1.UU.NET [192.48.96.5]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id MAA29347 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 12:41:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay1.shore.net by relay1.UU.NET with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: relay1.shore.net [192.233.85.129]) id QQbely10253; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 15:41:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smoe.org (smoe.org [204.167.97.154]) by relay1.shore.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA26420 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 15:37:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: by smoe.org (4.1/SMI-4.1-hack1) id AA19793; Mon, 26 Aug 96 15:37:11 EDT From: jeffw@smoe.org (Jeff Wasilko) Message-Id: <9608261937.AA19793@smoe.org> Subject: Potential spam from dis.org (fwd) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 15:37:10 -0400 (EDT) Organization: Jeff's Personal System X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Guess . writes: > From voy@merde.dis.org Mon Aug 26 13:47:13 1996 > Message-Id: <199608261746.KAA27939@merde.dis.org> > To: jeffw@smoe.org > Cc: postmaster@dis.org > Subject: Potential spam from dis.org > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > Content-Id: <27884.841081472.1@merde.dis.org> > Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 10:44:32 -0700 > From: "Guess ." > > >------- Forwarded Message > > > >From: jeffw@smoe.org (Jeff Wasilko) > >Message-Id: <9608261725.AA19265@smoe.org> > >Subject: Potential spam from dis.org? > > > > > >There seems to be something unusal going on at your domain...many > >mailing list servers are getting hit with 'lists' command, which > >in the past has been a prelude to a large spam. > > > >You might want to post a note of explanation to the list-managers > >list. > > > >------- End of Forwarded Message > > > > sorry to offend you, I am a High School sophmore and am writing a paper > for class on internet growth and am counting the number of mailing lists > on the internet and I plan to use this to show how big it is even with out > the world wide web. > > +Vance Oakley > > From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 26 13:58:39 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id NAA03007 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 13:49:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sacmgr.mp.usbr.gov (sacmgr.mp.usbr.gov [140.214.12.4]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id NAA02999 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 13:48:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by sacto.mp.usbr.gov (MX V4.2 VAX) id 8; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 13:45:13 PDT Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 13:45:10 PDT From: "Henry W. Miller" To: bbrown@dkmc.org CC: list-managers@greatcircle.com, henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009A76DD.43D3412C.8@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: RE: Heads Up - dis.org Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > From: MX%"bbrown@dkmc.org" 26-AUG-1996 08:55:54.47 > Subj: Heads Up - dis.org > I administer three domains. All three have received "lists" commands to > majordomo and listserv from addresses at 'dis.org' within the past 30 > hours. > > This may be completely innocent, but I doubt it; the headers were either > lamely forged, or just lame, e.g. loca1host, merde.dis.org, etc. > > Heads up out there! > --Bob > Yeah, they hit my mail hub over the weekend too. Hopefully, the fact that they are from Berkeley means that they're fairly harmless... Has anyone sent a message to them, demanding an explanation for their actions? -HWM From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 26 14:29:05 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id OAA03842 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 14:15:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from prawn.fishy.net (flounder.fishy.net [206.156.56.34]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id OAA03818 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 14:15:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sturgeon.fishy.net (sturgeon.fishy.net [172.16.1.3]) by prawn.fishy.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id RAA15836 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 17:10:31 -0400 Received: (from bonnie@localhost) by sturgeon.fishy.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) id RAA105530 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 17:10:31 -0400 From: Bonnie Message-Id: <199608262110.RAA105530@sturgeon.fishy.net> Subject: Has Juno disappeared? To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 17:10:31 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Is anyone else having problems with their Juno subscribers today or is it just us? (Juno is a company offering free e-mail, and we have a good number of subscribers from there.) ---------------------------------------------------- nslookup juno.com Server: pidnsa1y.prodigy.com Address: 192.207.105.47 *** No address (A) records available for juno.com ---------------------------------------------------- nslookup juno.net Server: pidnsa1y.prodigy.com Address: 192.207.105.47 *** No address (A) records available for juno.net ---------------------------------------------------- Since juno.com is not found, the bounces go directly to the list owners, and don't stayed queued. We are contacting their Technical/Zone Contact. I can look up Juno's domain servers: ---------------------------------------------------- Server: pidnsa1y.prodigy.com Address: 192.207.105.47 Non-authoritative answer: Name: deshaw.com Address: 149.77.1.1 ---------------------------------------------------- Server: pidnsa1y.prodigy.com Address: 192.207.105.47 Non-authoritative answer: Name: ns1.shaw.net Address: 149.77.121.1 ---------------------------------------------------- but not ping either of them from where I am. Bonnie Scott Prodigy Services Corp. From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 26 15:29:59 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id PAA06989 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 15:22:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eri.erinet.com (eri.erinet.com [198.6.245.100]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id PAA06954 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 15:22:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by eri.erinet.com (8.6.12/EriNet) id SAA06353; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 18:22:49 -0400 From: timothy@erinet.com (Tim Finkenstadt) Message-Id: <199608262222.SAA06353@eri.erinet.com> Subject: Re: Has Juno disappeared? To: bonnie@staff.prodigy.com (Bonnie) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 18:22:48 -0400 (EDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <199608262110.RAA105530@sturgeon.fishy.net> from "Bonnie" at Aug 26, 96 05:10:31 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] Content-Type: text Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Just because there is no A record for a domain name does *not* mean they have bitten the dust. Here's what I get just by scratching the surface a little, Bonnie: Default Server: eri.erinet.com Address: 198.6.245.100 > set type=any > juno.com Server: eri.erinet.com Address: 198.6.245.100 Non-authoritative answer: juno.com nameserver = DESHAW.COM juno.com nameserver = NS1.SHAW.NET juno.com preference = 50, mail exchanger = relay.juno.com juno.com preference = 10, mail exchanger = a.mx.juno.com juno.com preference = 10, mail exchanger = b.mx.juno.com Authoritative answers can be found from: juno.com nameserver = DESHAW.COM juno.com nameserver = NS1.SHAW.NET DESHAW.COM internet address = 149.77.1.1 NS1.SHAW.NET internet address = 149.77.121.1 relay.juno.com internet address = 205.231.101.241 relay.juno.com internet address = 205.231.100.241 a.mx.juno.com internet address = 205.231.100.21 a.mx.juno.com internet address = 205.231.101.21 a.mx.juno.com internet address = 205.231.100.22 a.mx.juno.com internet address = 205.231.101.22 b.mx.juno.com internet address = 205.231.100.23 b.mx.juno.com internet address = 205.231.101.23 b.mx.juno.com internet address = 205.231.100.24 b.mx.juno.com internet address = 205.231.101.24 > Since juno.com is not found, the bounces go directly to the list owners, and > don't stayed queued. We are contacting their Technical/Zone Contact. > > but not ping either of them from where I am. > > Bonnie Scott > Prodigy Services Corp. Hope this helps you. From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 26 15:43:39 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id PAA07551 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 15:38:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gauntlet-1.trusted.com (gauntlet-1.trusted.com [204.254.155.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id PAA07542 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 15:38:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by gauntlet-1.trusted.com; id SAA22146; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 18:40:05 -0400 Received: from hilo.trusted.com(10.0.1.126) by gauntlet-1.trusted.com via smap (V3.1.1) id xma022144; Mon, 26 Aug 96 18:39:51 -0400 Received: by hilo.trusted.com (1.37.109.4/16.2) id AA01440; Mon, 26 Aug 96 18:40:03 -0400 Date: Mon, 26 Aug 96 18:40:03 -0400 From: Mark Sienkiewicz Message-Id: <9608262240.AA01440@hilo.trusted.com> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: removal of 'phoenix.oulu.fi' in your mailing lists Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >In general, when a host is taken down, what is the best method to handle these >massive mailing list subscriptions?? Hosts vanish from the net all the time. If yours does too, it can't be that bad. As a list manager, I'm going to drop addresses at your host just like any other address that suddenly becomes unreachable. I suggest that you *don't* try to help the students who could not follow instructions to change their subscriptions. It's a waste of your time and if it is important, they will resubscribe anyway. From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 26 19:16:34 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id TAA03075 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 19:03:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay1.shore.net (relay1.shore.net [192.233.85.129]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id TAA03032 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 19:03:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smoe.org (smoe.org [204.167.97.154]) by relay1.shore.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA11685; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 22:03:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: by smoe.org (4.1/SMI-4.1-hack1) id AA23250; Mon, 26 Aug 96 22:03:57 EDT From: jeffw@smoe.org (Jeff Wasilko) Message-Id: <9608270203.AA23250@smoe.org> Subject: Re: Heads Up - dis.org To: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov (Henry W. Miller) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 22:03:57 -0400 (EDT) Cc: bbrown@dkmc.org, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov In-Reply-To: <009A76DD.43D3412C.8@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> from "Henry W. Miller" at Aug 26, 96 01:45:10 pm Organization: Jeff's Personal System X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Henry W. Miller writes: > Yeah, they hit my mail hub over the weekend too. Hopefully, the > fact that they are from Berkeley means that they're fairly harmless... > Has anyone sent a message to them, demanding an explanation for their > actions? I sent a note to the list earlier today, but I don't know if it ever arrived. I sent a note to the person in question, and he claimed that he was a high school student doing a survey on how much the net had grown (not counting web sites). Jeff From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 26 21:13:51 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id VAA21622 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 21:07:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.his.com (mail.his.com [205.177.25.9]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id VAA21613 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 21:07:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.177.25.174] (brad.his.com [205.177.25.174]) by mail.his.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id AAA23940; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 00:07:41 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199608262110.RAA105530@sturgeon.fishy.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 00:06:39 -0400 To: Bonnie , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: Has Juno disappeared? Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 5:10 PM -0400 8/26/1996, Bonnie wrote: >Since juno.com is not found, the bounces go directly to the list owners, and >don't stayed queued. We are contacting their Technical/Zone Contact. Hopefully your mail machines understand MX records, and aren't bouncing all mail for all domains that can be reached only via MX records, such as AOL. >I can look up Juno's domain servers: [ ... deletia ... ] >but not ping either of them from where I am. They may have blocked all ICMP packets are their firewalls, just like AOL. For us, it's a security feature. -- Brad Knowles, MIME/PGP: brad@his.com comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer finger brad@his.com for my PGP Public Keys and Geek Code The comp.mail.sendmail FAQ is at From list-managers-owner Mon Aug 26 23:59:09 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id XAA06439 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 23:48:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay1.UU.NET (relay1.UU.NET [192.48.96.5]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id XAA06432 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 23:48:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eri.erinet.com by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: eri.erinet.com [198.6.245.100]) id QQbels18190; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 14:14:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: by eri.erinet.com (8.6.12/EriNet) id OAA29786; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 14:13:00 -0400 From: timothy@erinet.com (Tim Finkenstadt) Message-Id: <199608261813.OAA29786@eri.erinet.com> Subject: Update - dis.org To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 14:12:59 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <9608261707.AA19202@smoe.org> from "Jeff Wasilko" at Aug 26, 96 01:07:05 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] Content-Type: text Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Greetings, I received this reply to a message I sent to find out what the deal was: > sorry to offend you, I am a High School sophmore and am writing a paper > for class on internet growth and am counting the number of mailing lists > on the internet and I plan to use this to show how big it is even with out > the world wide web. > > +Vance Oakley I know it's improper to post private email, but this way y'all know what's going on. If it's true... Tim Finkenstadt timothy@erinet.com EriNet Postmaster From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 27 06:29:24 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id GAA29990 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 06:15:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smarty.smart.net ([206.27.242.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id GAA29962 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 06:14:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [206.97.124.85] (wcs.smart.net [206.97.124.85]) by smarty.smart.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA28316 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 09:17:43 -0400 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 09:19:58 +0000 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: wcs@smart.net (Woodstock Computer Services) Subject: Re: Potential spam from dis.org Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I administer three VERY small majordomo lists, which run on someone else's server. One of the lists has closed subscriptions, and one of the other two is moderated. The admin address I have established is majordomo@(org.name). That address serves no automatic functions - it's just a convenient name for me to filter posts into that relate to my lists. Over the weekend, my majordomo address also received a "list" command from VOY@WORST.COM, supposedly mailed TO majordomo@dis.org (if I remember it correctly...). At the time, I thought it was some sort of innocent mistake. I just read Monday's digest of List-Managers, and am not so sure any more. Very honestly -- I only ever understand about 1/2 of what I read here; but I'm trying my best to learn. The Monday posts helped make me paranoid, but I'm not sure if there's anything happening I should actually be worried about or not. Can someone please summarize (in newbie English) what all the posts concerning "dis.org" actually mean, and let me know how concerned I should be? What action(s), if any, should I take? Thanks! -John From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 27 06:44:53 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id GAA02077 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 06:34:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wildride.schoneal.com (wildride.schoneal.com [206.81.38.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id GAA02023 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 06:34:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from meo@localhost) by wildride.schoneal.com (8.6.11/8.6.11) id IAA00237; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 08:37:22 -0500 Message-Id: <199608271337.IAA00237@wildride.schoneal.com> Subject: Re: removal of 'phoenix.oulu.fi' in your mailing lists To: mhotti@lists.oulu.fi (Marko Hotti) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 08:37:22 -0500 (CDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <199608231452.RAA07457@lists.oulu.fi> from "Marko Hotti" at Aug 23, 96 05:52:01 pm From: meo@schoneal.com (Miles O'Neal) Reply-To: meo@schoneal.com (Miles O'Neal) Organization: Schober O'Neal, Inc / Net Ads X-WWW-URL: http://www.schoneal.com/~meo/ X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Marko Hotti said... | |All email to phoenix will be replied to using an autoreplier stating that |students' email addresses are in the form from now on. |Judging by the vast amount of bounced email our postmaster receives the |addresses have not been changed. This is a really, really good reason to use aliases. Like mailhost.oulu.fi, or if you have more than one, mailhost3.oulu.fi . This way you can move the alias with no hassles to the users. In the meantime, if phoenix is going away, why not just add an alias of pheonix to raita? -Miles meo@schoneal.com From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 27 07:43:50 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id HAA06433 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 07:29:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from menger.eecs.stevens-tech.edu (menger.eecs.stevens-tech.edu [155.246.89.81]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id HAA06368 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 07:28:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from home.spfld.com (amullick.u97.stevens-tech.edu [155.246.216.20]) by menger.eecs.stevens-tech.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA24555 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 10:28:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (iiw@localhost) by home.spfld.com (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id KAA23144 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 10:26:14 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: home.spfld.com: iiw owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 10:26:13 -0400 (EDT) From: Apu X-Sender: iiw@home.spfld.com To: List Managers mailing list Subject: Full headers in MS Mail? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Apologies if this is not the best place for it, but I've been having problems getting the Microsoft's web site and haven't found another good source with this info... One of the subscribers to a list that is hosted on a IIW server is reporting that he is getting duplicate copies of every posting sent to the list. However, I find only one entry for his e-mail address in the .subscribers file (ListProc). Since nobody else if having the same problem (that I'm aware of), I'm trying to figure out where the other copy is coming from. I asked that he send me a copy of the duplicates with the full headers so I can analyze them, but he states that he is using MS Mail and that the only headers he has is a From: header (with just the list name, and no host info), a To: header (with a % substituted for a @) and a Date: and Subject:. Unfortunately, I don't have a copy of MS Mail with which to figure out how to get a full set of headers out of it, so I was hoping somebody here knew. (I don't suppose a List Manager somewhere has a FAQ explaining how to get the full headers from the many e-mail client packages available along with things like how to turn of the WINMAIL.DAT file and other client software specific things like that?) Apu Internet Images Worldwide ======================================================================= IIW is a full-service Net presence creation agency--come check us out!! Internet Images Worldwide From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 27 09:14:14 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id IAA13474 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 08:52:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from netcom18.netcom.com (netcom18.netcom.com [192.100.81.131]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id IAA13432 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 08:52:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (grafolog@localhost) by netcom18.netcom.com (8.6.13/Netcom) id PAA18368; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 15:52:09 GMT Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 15:52:09 +0000 (GMT) From: jonathon X-Sender: grafolog@netcom18 To: Apu cc: List Managers mailing list Subject: Re: Full headers in MS Mail? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: x-no-archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Tue, 27 Aug 1996, Apu wrote: > (I don't suppose a List Manager somewhere has a FAQ explaining how to > client software specific things like that?) That sounds like a very useful thing to have. I haven't seen one, though. xan jonathon grafolog@netcom.com However, if you're tired of the Lesser of N evils, Cthulu's export policy is that you can't escape anyway, and your puny mortal lives will be absorbed along with his morning coffee. Your encryption technology is futile against the Elder Gods, and the arcane formulas in the Cyphernomicon of that mad physicist Tim The Enchanter may summon spirits from the vasty deep, but no secrets are safe from Nyarla-S-Ahothep who knows all and sees all. Bill Stewart From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 27 09:59:36 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id JAA22029 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 09:46:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mtigwc01.worldnet.att.net (mailhost.worldnet.att.net [204.127.129.3]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id JAA21902 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 09:46:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 5.seattle-1.wa.dial-access.att.net ([165.238.132.5]) by mtigwc01.worldnet.att.net (post.office MTA v2.0 0613 ) with SMTP id AAA18894; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 16:46:06 +0000 Received: by 5.seattle-1.wa.dial-access.att.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BB93FC.9A4D00C0@5.seattle-1.wa.dial-access.att.net>; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 09:46:21 -0700 Message-ID: <01BB93FC.9A4D00C0@5.seattle-1.wa.dial-access.att.net> From: Fredric Holtz To: "'Apu'" Cc: "'Mailing List Managers'" Subject: RE: Full headers in MS Mail? Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 09:46:19 -0700 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Right click on the message subject in the message pane. This opens properties, then select the DETAILS Tab to get full header information. ---------- From: Apu[SMTP:apu@inet-images.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 1996 7:26 AM To: List Managers mailing list Subject: Full headers in MS Mail? Apologies if this is not the best place for it, but I've been having problems getting the Microsoft's web site and haven't found another good source with this info... One of the subscribers to a list that is hosted on a IIW server is reporting that he is getting duplicate copies of every posting sent to the list. However, I find only one entry for his e-mail address in the .subscribers file (ListProc). Since nobody else if having the same problem (that I'm aware of), I'm trying to figure out where the other copy is coming from. I asked that he send me a copy of the duplicates with the full headers so I can analyze them, but he states that he is using MS Mail and that the only headers he has is a From: header (with just the list name, and no host info), a To: header (with a % substituted for a @) and a Date: and Subject:. Unfortunately, I don't have a copy of MS Mail with which to figure out how to get a full set of headers out of it, so I was hoping somebody here knew. (I don't suppose a List Manager somewhere has a FAQ explaining how to get the full headers from the many e-mail client packages available along with things like how to turn of the WINMAIL.DAT file and other client software specific things like that?) Apu Internet Images Worldwide ======================================================================= IIW is a full-service Net presence creation agency--come check us out!! Internet Images Worldwide From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 27 15:44:12 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id PAA05551 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 15:40:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from CU.NIH.GOV (cu.nih.gov [128.231.64.112]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id PAA05539 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 15:40:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199608272240.PAA05539@miles.greatcircle.com> To: apu@inet-images.com cc: List-Managers@greatcircle.com From: "Roger Fajman" Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 18:40:01 EDT Subject: Re: Full headers in MS Mail? Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > I asked that he send me a copy of the duplicates with the full headers > so I can analyze them, but he states that he is using MS Mail and that > the only headers he has is a From: header (with just the list name, > and no host info), a To: header (with a % substituted for a @) and a > Date: and Subject:. Unfortunately, I don't have a copy of MS Mail > with which to figure out how to get a full set of headers out of it, > so I was hoping somebody here knew. With the Microsoft Mail Windows Client, add StripGatewayHeaders=0 to the MSMAIL.INI file. This is assuming that the SMTP gateway is configured to pass the headers through. With the Exchange client (for Windows 95 and NT, at least), double click on the word From in the message header, then select Headers. From list-managers-owner Tue Aug 27 19:46:00 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id TAA22290 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 19:39:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.his.com (mail.his.com [205.177.25.9]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id TAA22271 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 19:39:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.177.25.174] (brad.his.com [205.177.25.174]) by mail.his.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA04643; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 22:39:32 -0400 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 22:22:55 -0400 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: Has Juno disappeared? Cc: timothy@erinet.com (Tim Finkenstadt), bonnie@staff.prodigy.com (Bonnie) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 6:22 PM -0400 8/26/1996, Tim Finkenstadt wrote: >Non-authoritative answer: >juno.com nameserver = DESHAW.COM >juno.com nameserver = NS1.SHAW.NET >juno.com preference = 50, mail exchanger = relay.juno.com >juno.com preference = 10, mail exchanger = a.mx.juno.com >juno.com preference = 10, mail exchanger = b.mx.juno.com > >Authoritative answers can be found from: >juno.com nameserver = DESHAW.COM >juno.com nameserver = NS1.SHAW.NET >DESHAW.COM internet address = 149.77.1.1 >NS1.SHAW.NET internet address = 149.77.121.1 >relay.juno.com internet address = 205.231.101.241 >relay.juno.com internet address = 205.231.100.241 >a.mx.juno.com internet address = 205.231.100.21 >a.mx.juno.com internet address = 205.231.101.21 >a.mx.juno.com internet address = 205.231.100.22 >a.mx.juno.com internet address = 205.231.101.22 >b.mx.juno.com internet address = 205.231.100.23 >b.mx.juno.com internet address = 205.231.101.23 >b.mx.juno.com internet address = 205.231.100.24 >b.mx.juno.com internet address = 205.231.101.24 Looks to me like they learned a thing or three from AOL. Those subdomain names look awfully familiar.... -- Brad Knowles, MIME/PGP: brad@his.com comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer finger brad@his.com for my PGP Public Keys and Geek Code The comp.mail.sendmail FAQ is at From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 28 01:29:00 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id BAA27977 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 01:28:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from weber.ucsd.edu (weber.ucsd.edu [132.239.147.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id BAA27970 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 01:28:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from cnorman@localhost) by weber.ucsd.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id BAA14644; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 01:28:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 01:28:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Cyndi Norman Message-Id: <199608280828.BAA14644@weber.ucsd.edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM CC: cnorman@weber.ucsd.edu Subject: AT&T/Lucent Bounces Reply-to: cnorman@weber.ucsd.edu Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I have been getting bounce messages from att.com recently. They seem to have a standard way of changing email addresses from the old att.com to the new lucent.com, so if you have att.com addresses, you may wish to jump the gun on address changes/removals (though not all addresses will change, I assume). Why? cause whoever wrote the bounce software made it bounce to the whole list (grrrr). Each and every post to my list is being followed by the bounce below, and posted to all. I have, of course, removed the offending address. I also wrote to postmaster@lucent.com, but that bounced as a bad address. I will try emsr-se@list.lucent.com next though I was avoiding it as it sounds like a mailing list. Any ideas? ----- The following message for a Lucent Technologies associate is being delivered in spite of the fact that it was addressed (either explicitly or implicitly) to an AT&T mail server. This forwarding service is temporary. To avoid misdirected e-mail, please use the correct Lucent e-mail address. The preferred format is @lucent.com (AT&T Mail users should use internet!lucent.com!). In this case, please send to cotsonas@lucent.com not to george.p.cotsonas@att.com For more information, if you can access the Lucent internal web, see http://ems.web.lucent.com/lucent/fwd.html, otherwise call your local customer support center for assistance. This message is brought to you by the EMS Team (emsr-se@list.lucent.com). ----- Cyndi __________________________________________________________________________ "There's nothing wrong with me. Maybe there's Cyndi Norman something wrong with the universe." (ST:TNG) cnorman@ucsd.edu ___________________________________________ http://weber.ucsd.edu/~cnorman From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 28 02:43:46 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id CAA02976 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 02:37:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail2.dircon.co.uk (mail2.dircon.co.uk [194.112.32.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id CAA02969 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 02:36:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from diversity.org.uk (diversity.org.uk [194.112.46.199]) by mail2.dircon.co.uk (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA28795 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 10:34:45 +0100 (BST) From: Nigel Whitfield Subject: Re: Full headers in MS Mail? Organization: Digital Diversity Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 09:26:38 GMT Message-ID: References: Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In article , Apu wrote: >(I don't suppose a List Manager somewhere has a FAQ explaining how to >get the full headers from the many e-mail client packages available >along with things like how to turn of the WINMAIL.DAT file and other >client software specific things like that?) Not done the full works, but I do have a document on WINMAIL.DAT, which is the thing that used to cause a lot of problems (now my software just bounces messages back to the sender if it finds it). Other list managers are welcome to grab the file, which can be retrieved by sending a message with the line send exchange as subject or body to uk-motss-SERVER@dircon.co.uk Feel free to amend and include in your own list docs. Nigel. -- Nigel Whitfield nigel@diversity.org.uk Digital Diversity nigel@stonewall.demon.co.uk and uk-motss ***** All demon.co.uk sites are independently run internet hosts ***** From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 28 07:30:37 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id HAA21421 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 07:15:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from agt.net (www.ab.sympatico.ca [198.161.156.3]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id HAA21412 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 07:15:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from clgrpx04-port-56.agt.net (clgrpx04-port-56.agt.net [198.161.156.250]) by agt.net (8.7.5/8.6.9) with SMTP id IAA20191 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 08:15:10 -0600 (MDT) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 08:15:10 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <199608281415.IAA20191@agt.net> X-Sender: lnault@mail.agt.net (Unverified) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: lnault@agt.net (Larry Nault) Subject: software for Windows 3.1 X-Mailer: Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I am new to this list so please forgive me if I am rehashing an old old question. I am looking for mailing list management software (preferably available as shareware) that will operate under windows 3.1. If you can recommend any software or point me in the right direction it would be sincerely appreciated. Thanks in advance for your assistance. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ _____ _____ / ~ L. Nault ~ / \ ___ / \ / ~ Professional Services ~ / \/ / \/ \-/ ~ Research Specialist ~ \ |=| / / \ |=| / ~ Calgary, AB ~ \_____/ / \_____/ ~ researcher@agt.net ~ / ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ /____ \ / \____________/ \__________/ Web Site http://www.agt.net/public/lnault/home.htm From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 28 11:01:14 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id KAA11826 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 10:44:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ibmmail.COM (ibmmail.com [199.171.26.3]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id KAA11731 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 10:44:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199608281744.KAA11731@miles.greatcircle.com> Received: from us.ibm.com by ibmmail.COM (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with BSMTP id 3105; Wed, 28 Aug 96 13:23:19 EDT Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 12:35:49 EDT From: jcanterbury@us.ibm.com To: list-managers@greatcircle.com X-Sender-Info: Jerry L. Canterbury t/l 372-3302 B183, 2J145 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Spam Alert Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Just received an e-mail spam from rr@newnorth.net, trying to sell some kind of mutual fund. He hit both of my lists, one of which isn't on the List of Lists, so he must be using the Majordomo 'list' command to find them. BTW, I always find it amusing to forward these financial broker spams back to the sender with my complaint, along with a copy to enforcement@sec.gov (making sure to explicitly point out the CC to the offender). I have a feeling that many of these spams are by fly-by-night organizations, so perhaps the SEC will take an interest. And, perhaps it will slow down some of these types of spam. Jerry Canterbury, Buckeye Consulting Internet: jcanterbury@us.ibm.com or jcanterb@worldweb.net "Children left unattanded will be towed at owners expense." From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 28 14:29:18 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id OAA10857 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 14:21:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.oulu.fi (lists.oulu.fi [130.231.241.85]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id OAA10792 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 14:20:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (mhotti@localhost) by lists.oulu.fi (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id AAA04102; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 00:23:42 +0300 Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 00:23:42 +0300 (EET DST) From: Marko Hotti Reply-To: Marko Hotti To: list-managers@greatcircle.com cc: alerts@oulu.fi Subject: PAML Processor??? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Our mailing list server has received dozens of commands from (PAML Processor) which first asks for the list of available mailing lists and then does a 'who' command on each on them. My guess is that someone is trying to gather a large email address base and then send spam material to these addresses. The account name 'PAML Processor' (PAML as Publicly Available Mailing Lists) is some sort of desperate effort to disguise the actions. Has anyone of you encountered this recently? --Marko Hotti University of Oulu From paml@oosack.reo.dec.com Thu Aug 29 00:22:10 1996 Return-Path: paml@oosack.reo.dec.com Received: from mail13.digital.com (mail13.digital.com [192.208.46.30]) by lists.oulu.fi (8.6.12/8.6.9) with ESMTP id QAA07645 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 16:20:31 +0300 Received: from sjunix.reo.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV) id TAA11000; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 19:15:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from oosack..reo.dec.com by sjunix.reo.dec.com (5.65/MS-010395) id AA22176; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 00:15:40 +0100 Received: by oosack.reo.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Jul96-0115PM) id AA23412; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 00:14:46 +0100 Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 00:14:46 +0100 From: PAML Processor Message-Id: <9608262314.AA23412@oosack.reo.dec.com> Apparently-To: majordomo@LISTS.OULU.FI WHO ekl-paul From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 28 15:04:10 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id OAA14280 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 14:55:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay1.shore.net (relay1.shore.net [192.233.85.129]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id OAA14179 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 14:54:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smoe.org (smoe.org [204.167.97.154]) by relay1.shore.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA11350; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 17:52:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: by smoe.org (4.1/SMI-4.1-hack1) id AA13308; Wed, 28 Aug 96 17:52:15 EDT From: jeffw@smoe.org (Jeff Wasilko) Message-Id: <9608282152.AA13308@smoe.org> Subject: Re: PAML Processor??? To: mhotti@lists.oulu.fi Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 17:52:15 -0400 (EDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, alerts@oulu.fi, postmaster@oosack.reo.dec.com In-Reply-To: from "Marko Hotti" at Aug 29, 96 00:23:42 am Organization: Jeff's Personal System X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Marko Hotti writes: > > > Our mailing list server has received dozens of commands from > (PAML Processor) which first asks for the list > of available mailing lists and then does a 'who' command on each on them. > > My guess is that someone is trying to gather a large email address base > and then send spam material to these addresses. The account name 'PAML > Processor' (PAML as Publicly Available Mailing Lists) is some sort of > desperate effort to disguise the actions. > > Has anyone of you encountered this recently? Yes, he hit me twice, but my lists command is disabled: jane% whichlog paml /usr/local/bin/majordomo/Log:Aug 23 11:47:15 jane majordomo[17277] {PAML Processor } lists /usr/local/bin/majordomo/Log:Aug 23 14:51:36 jane majordomo[18588] {PAML Processor } lists From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 28 20:59:00 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id UAA26849 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 20:56:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.his.com (mail.his.com [205.177.25.9]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id UAA26803 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 20:55:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.177.25.174] (brad.his.com [205.177.25.174]) by mail.his.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id XAA27377; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 23:56:13 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 23:52:51 -0400 To: Marko Hotti , list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: PAML Processor??? Cc: alerts@oulu.fi Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 5:23 PM -0400 8/28/1996, Marko Hotti wrote: >Our mailing list server has received dozens of commands from > (PAML Processor) which first asks for the list >of available mailing lists and then does a 'who' command on each on them. My guess is that they are trying to secretly extend the scope of coverage of Alta Vista to include all Publicly Accessible Mailing Lists, as well as all web pages and presumably all Usenet News. Still, that's not necessarily something you want to allow. -- Brad Knowles, MIME/PGP: brad@his.com comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer finger brad@his.com for my PGP Public Keys and Geek Code The comp.mail.sendmail FAQ is at From list-managers-owner Wed Aug 28 23:58:53 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id XAA05161 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 23:54:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from postie.das.gov.au (postie.das.gov.au [147.211.53.231]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id XAA05152 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 23:54:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from garry.pur.das.gov.au (garry.pur.das.gov.au [147.211.63.110]) by postie.das.gov.au (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA08832 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 16:57:24 +1000 (EST) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 16:57:24 +1000 (EST) Message-Id: <2.2.16.19960829165313.394f8950@zeus.das.gov.au> X-Sender: strden@zeus.das.gov.au X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Denis Strangman Subject: Bandwidth reduction Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk List-Managers A colleague is preparing an article on bandwidth conservation by end users. Has anyone seen or heard of (or taken a guess at) the likely bandwidth use reduction effect of encouraging posters to economise with sig files and truncating/paraphrasing messages to which they are replying, first from a list point of view and secondly from an overall Internet perspective? He has come up with these basic prescriptions. Anyone suggest others? 2. Conserving bandwidth when using e-mail 2.1 Before replying to an e-list message, check whether your reply is going to the intended recipient 2.2 When replying to an e-mail message, remove text from the original message that is irrelevant to the latest contribution 2.3 Compress large files before sending 2.4 Keep signatures to a minimum Thanks for any assistance. Denis Strangman Department of Administrative Services, GPO Box 1920 Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia. E-mail: denis.strangman@das.gov.au Phone: +61 6 2758808 fax +61 6 2753464 PUBSEC URL: http://www.das.gov.au/~world/listserv/pub_sec.html From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 29 00:59:09 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id AAA06937 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 00:49:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from server21.digital.fr (server21.digital.fr [193.56.15.21]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id AAA06930 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 00:49:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.vbo.dec.com (mail.vbo.dec.com [16.36.208.34]) by server21.digital.fr (8.7.5/8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17277; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 09:51:56 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from vbormc.vbo.dec.com (vbormc.vbo.dec.com [16.36.208.94]) by mail.vbo.dec.com (8.7.3/8.7) with ESMTP id JAA06603; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 09:52:48 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from movies.enet (daemon@localhost) by vbormc.vbo.dec.com (8.7.3/8.7) with SMTP id JAA16153; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 09:50:19 +0200 Message-Id: <199608290750.JAA16153@vbormc.vbo.dec.com> Received: from movies.enet; by vbormc.enet; Thu, 29 Aug 96 09:50:19 MET DST Date: Thu, 29 Aug 96 09:50:19 MET DST From: "Paul Randal, " To: "mhotti@lists.oulu.fi"@vbormc.vbo.dec.com Cc: "list-managers@greatcircle.com"@vbormc.vbo.dec.com, "alerts@oulu.fi"@vbormc.vbo.dec.com, randal@movies.enet.dec.com Apparently-To: alerts@oulu.fi, list-managers@greatcircle.com, mhotti@lists.oulu.fi Subject: PAML mail Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Guys, I can assure you that this has nothing to do with spamming. We're just trying to gather email addresses for a perfectly legitimate reason. If we caused you any hassle, please accept our apologies... but, if you don't want to get any requests for lists, why do you run a listserver? Cheers, Paul. From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 29 01:18:41 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id BAA07899 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 01:12:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from server.postmodern.com (server.postmodern.com [207.33.130.54]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id BAA07892 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 01:12:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 207.33.130.51 (derrida.postmodern.com [207.33.130.51]) by server.postmodern.com (8.7.5/mcb-960422) with SMTP id BAA27518; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 01:11:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3225509F.57A9@postmodern.com> Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 01:11:45 -0700 From: "Michael C. Berch" Reply-To: mcb@postmodern.com Organization: Postmodern Consulting, California USA X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Macintosh; I; 68K) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Randal CC: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: PAML mail References: <199608290750.JAA16153@vbormc.vbo.dec.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Paul Randal wrote: > > Guys, > > I can assure you that this has nothing to do with spamming. We're just trying > to gather email addresses for a perfectly legitimate reason. And that perfectly legitimate reason would be...? -- Michael C. Berch mcb@postmodern.com From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 29 01:29:09 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id BAA10098 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 01:28:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailbox.neosoft.com (mailbox.neosoft.com [206.109.1.16]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id BAA10050 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 01:28:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bonkers.taronga.com (root@bonkers.neosoft.com [206.109.2.48]) by mailbox.neosoft.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA29237 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 03:28:35 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from arielle@localhost) by bonkers.taronga.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id DAA19152 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 03:22:09 -0500 From: arielle@taronga.com (Stephanie da Silva) Message-Id: <199608290822.DAA19152@bonkers.taronga.com> Subject: PAML mail To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 03:22:09 -0500 (CDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > Guys, Guys? > I can assure you that this has nothing to do with spamming. We're just trying > to gather email addresses for a perfectly legitimate reason. Then why are you using the acronym "PAML", which is already associated with the existing "Publicly Accessible Mailing Lists" document? > If we caused you any hassle, please accept our apologies... but, if you don't > want to get any requests for lists, why do you run a listserver? Well, gee Officer, the door was unlocked and the keys were in the ignition.... *sigh* >From past experience of list abuse, the act of accessing many mailing lists with no intention of joining any of them is widely interpreted as a hostile gesture. The mailing list servers were not put there for your convenience or purpose, whatever that may be (which you have yet to reveal). From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 29 07:44:29 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id HAA01841 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 07:21:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay1.shore.net (relay1.shore.net [192.233.85.129]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id HAA01830 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 07:21:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smoe.org (smoe.org [204.167.97.154]) by relay1.shore.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA00450 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 10:21:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: by smoe.org (4.1/SMI-4.1-hack1) id AA21126; Thu, 29 Aug 96 10:21:53 EDT From: jeffw@smoe.org (Jeff Wasilko) Message-Id: <9608291421.AA21126@smoe.org> Subject: Here's some more info for you.. (fwd) (PAML abuse) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 10:21:52 -0400 (EDT) Organization: Jeff's Personal System X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I don't make a habit of forwarding personal email, but this feels like a form letter and concerns all of us: Paul Randal, writes: > From randal@movies.enet.dec.com Thu Aug 29 09:57:51 1996 > Message-Id: <199608291357.PAA05996@vbormc.vbo.dec.com> > Date: Thu, 29 Aug 96 15:58:24 MET DST > From: "Paul Randal, " > To: "jeffw@smoe.org"@vbormc.vbo.dec.com > Apparently-To: jeffw@smoe.org > Subject: Here's some more info for you.. > > We apologize if our recent mailings to your listservers caused you any trouble. > What follows is an explanation of what happened, why, and what we've learned > from it. > > As some background, we're currently evaluating a possible internet email white > pages service. If this service proves to be viable, it should allow queries > for people based on their real world names, probably through both a web > interface and an address book, for those mail clients that can support it. > > For this service to be viable, there are two things that we feel we have to be > able to do. First, we have to be able to populate the database in some > relatively automated manner from already public data. Second, we nust be able > to limit the ability of users of the service to browse that data so that it > cannot be used to easily extract large mailing lists. > > For the first point above, we've been pursuing gathering data from several > public sources, one of which was the PAML list. Your site was contacted > during our test run as a result of our analysis of that list. Again we > apologise if this inconvenienced you. > > We have learned a couple of things from this test run. First, the batched > approach we took appears to have been both an annoyingly high load for some > systems, and a concern for those system administrators. It was clearly not our > intention that either happen. We are currently evaluating reducing the peak > levels of activity by partial, more balanced data crawls on a somewhat more > frequent basis. Second, we believe that we need a way for system > administrators to both allow a list to be public and to avoid data crawls such > as this. We are currently looking into ways to automatically do this. > > While we expect to need to periodically refresh our email data, we want to > emphasize that we will not do so until the above two points have been > incorporated. > > Thank you for your patience. > > > From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 29 08:29:50 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id IAA06585 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 08:21:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id IAA06547 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 08:21:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mne.ifi.uio.no (1232@mne.ifi.uio.no [129.240.70.5]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 17:21:16 +0200 From: Kjetil Torgrim Homme Received: (from kjetilho@localhost) by mne.ifi.uio.no ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 17:21:12 +0200 Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 17:21:12 +0200 Message-Id: <199608291521.21064.mne.ifi.uio.no@ifi.uio.no> To: denis.strangman@das.gov.au CC: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-reply-to: <2.2.16.19960829165313.394f8950@zeus.das.gov.au> (message from Denis Strangman on Thu, 29 Aug 1996 16:57:24 +1000 (EST)) Subject: Re: Bandwidth reduction Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk [Denis Strangman] | Has anyone seen or heard of (or taken a guess at) the likely | bandwidth use reduction effect of encouraging posters to economise | with sig files and truncating/paraphrasing messages to which they | are replying, first from a list point of view and secondly from an | overall Internet perspective? On the Internet perspective, it must be negligible. Even a 1 kB signature (14-15 lines) sent to a thousand recipients is still smaller than the load of a normal web page. However, wading though lots of redundant quoting and signatures is tiring, and it makes searching the archives more of a chore. I think the arguments should be centred on the impact on people, not on the use of computer resources. A quick count on my system reveals that 20-40% is headers, 10-15% is quoting (one list has 30% quoting). Checking for signatures is hard, so I didn't do that. For the most part, all these headers will be hidden from the user, so the perceived percentage of quoting is higher. Kjetil T. From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 29 10:12:17 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id JAA17182 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 09:43:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from idyllmtn.com (ayla.idyllmtn.com [206.16.238.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id JAA17132 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 09:43:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gates.idyllmtn.com by idyllmtn.com (8.6.8/Idyllmtn) id JAA18879; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 09:41:26 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19960829165524.0072d4b0@mail.idyllmtn.com> X-Sender: kynn@mail.idyllmtn.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 09:55:24 -0700 To: jeffw@smoe.org (Jeff Wasilko) From: Kynn Bartlett Subject: Re: Here's some more info for you.. (fwd) (PAML abuse) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >Paul Randal, writes: >> From randal@movies.enet.dec.com Thu Aug 29 09:57:51 1996 >> Message-Id: <199608291357.PAA05996@vbormc.vbo.dec.com> >> Date: Thu, 29 Aug 96 15:58:24 MET DST >> From: "Paul Randal, " >> To: "jeffw@smoe.org"@vbormc.vbo.dec.com >> Apparently-To: jeffw@smoe.org >> Subject: Here's some more info for you.. >> For this service to be viable, there are two things that we feel we have to be >> able to do. First, we have to be able to populate the database in some >> relatively automated manner from already public data. Gee, couldn't they, like, I dunno...ask first? Oh, wait, that's a silly idea. No profit in that, eh? Welcome to the New Internet, boys and girls. :p -- /\ /\ /\ /\ Kynn Bartlett / kynn@idyllmtn.com / \ / \/ \ / \ Idyll Mountain Internet / \ //\ /\ \ / \ '_| _` // \/ \__\ '_| _` Milestone NOW! idyllmtn.com/~kynn/icons.html From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 29 10:14:58 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id JAA20016 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 09:59:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mtigwc01.worldnet.att.net (mailhost.worldnet.att.net [204.127.129.3]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id JAA19824 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 09:58:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 59.seattle-1.wa.dial-access.att.net ([165.238.132.59]) by mtigwc01.worldnet.att.net (post.office MTA v2.0 0613 ) with SMTP id AAA25219; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 16:34:05 +0000 Received: by 59.seattle-1.wa.dial-access.att.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BB958D.4DC7FCE0@59.seattle-1.wa.dial-access.att.net>; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 09:34:41 -0700 Message-ID: <01BB958D.4DC7FCE0@59.seattle-1.wa.dial-access.att.net> From: Fredric Holtz To: "'Apu'" Cc: "'Mailing List Managers'" Subject: RE: Full headers in MS Mail? Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 09:34:39 -0700 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Opps... Read this as MS Internet Mail rather than MS Mail. Sorry. ---------- From: Fredric Holtz[SMTP:Someday@pobox.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 1996 9:46 AM To: 'Apu' Cc: 'Mailing List Managers' Subject: RE: Full headers in MS Mail? Right click on the message subject in the message pane. This opens properties, then select the DETAILS Tab to get full header information. < Post clipped for sake of space> ---------- From: Apu[SMTP:apu@inet-images.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 1996 7:26 AM To: List Managers mailing list Subject: Full headers in MS Mail? Unfortunately, I don't have a copy of MS Mail with which to figure out how to get a full set of headers out of it, so I was hoping somebody here knew. Apu ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 11:04:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from skyhawk.ecc.engr.uky.edu (skyhawk.ecc.engr.uky.edu [128.163.144.19]) by spitfire.ecc.engr.uky.edu (8.7.3/8.6.9) with ESMTP id OAA05369 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 14:08:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from morgan@localhost) by skyhawk.ecc.engr.uky.edu (8.6.10/8.6.10) id OAA16975 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 14:04:08 -0400 Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 14:04:08 -0400 From: Wes Morgan Message-Id: <199608291804.OAA16975@skyhawk.ecc.engr.uky.edu> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Bandwidth reduction Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >| Has anyone seen or heard of (or taken a guess at) the likely >| bandwidth use reduction effect of encouraging posters to economise >| with sig files and truncating/paraphrasing messages to which they >| are replying, first from a list point of view and secondly from an >| overall Internet perspective? > >On the Internet perspective, it must be negligible. Even a 1 kB >signature (14-15 lines) sent to a thousand recipients is still smaller >than the load of a normal web page. Hmmm...while the impact on a single system might be negligible, the impact on the overall Internet may be of more significance. If I trim 1Kb from my signature, that is one less kilobyte transmitted by *EVERY SITE EXCHANGING USENET NEWS*. That aggregate could be substantial. --Wes From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 29 11:59:26 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id LAA04504 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 11:57:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.clever.net (smtp.clever.net [208.5.7.252]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id LAA04487 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 11:56:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail-queue invoked by uid 0); 29 Aug 1996 18:46:19 -0000 Received: from ns3.clever.net (HELO www6.clever.net) (root@208.5.12.1) by smtp.clever.net with SMTP; 29 Aug 1996 18:46:19 -0000 Received: from llion (llion-cs1-03.llion.org [198.209.45.103]) by www6.clever.net (8.7.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id OAA17948 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 14:44:08 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199608291844.OAA17948@www6.clever.net> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Dr. Manion" Organization: Execu/Quest Marketing Consultants To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 12:34:51 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: Quoted-printable Subject: Re: Strange code... Reply-to: CEO@Citadel.Net X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.33) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Greetings! For some reason I started getting the following code in my FROM: as noted below. Any one have ideas why this is? Doesn't seem to be confined to this list. 80% of email received seems to be ok with the exception of this strange code all of the sudden appearing. Would appreicate any ideas. Leonard On 29 Aug 96 ,Denis Strangman insightfully wrote: > Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 16:57:24 +1000 (EST) > To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM > From: Denis Strangman <.=D640.=D640.=D640.=D640.=D640.=D640.=D6= 40.=D640.=D640.=D640.=D640.=D640.=D640.=D640.=D640.=D640.=D640.=D640.=D640= .=D640.=D640.=D640.=D640.=D640.=D640.=D640.=D640.=D640.=D640.=D640.=D640.=D6= 40.=D640.=D640.=D640.=D640.> > Subject: Bandwidth reduction From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 29 15:00:42 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id OAA22764 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 14:25:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from server.postmodern.com (server.postmodern.com [207.33.130.54]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id OAA22736 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 14:24:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 207.33.130.51 (derrida.postmodern.com [207.33.130.51]) by server.postmodern.com (8.7.5/mcb-960422) with SMTP id OAA29326; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 14:24:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <32260AAB.31A6@postmodern.com> Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 14:25:02 -0700 From: "Michael C. Berch" Reply-To: mcb@postmodern.com Organization: Postmodern Consulting, California USA X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Macintosh; I; 68K) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers Subject: Subscription forgeries from ibm.net to net.id addresses Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Watch out for forged subscriptions targeted at users in the net.id (Indonesia) domain, particularly wasantara.net.id and idola.net.id. There was a whole batch of them a few weeks ago, mostly aimed at groups of music-related lists, and it seems to have started again. Here is what I sent to the postmaster at ibm.net, where the messages seem to originate from. -- Michael C. Berch mcb@postmodern.com / mcb@greatcircle.com ----------------------------------------------------- Subject:Continued subscription forgeries from ibm.net via msu.net Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 14:21:00 -0700 From: "Michael C. Berch" Organization:Postmodern Consulting, California USA To: postmaster@ibm.net, postmaster@msu.edu We are continuing to get mailing list subscription forgeries for users in the wasantara.net.id and idola.et.id domains from dial-up SLIP accounts on ibm.net, apparently in Indonesia, posted through msu.edu. While the subscriptions have been blocked, they are an annoyance and failure to stop this abuse may result in blocking mailing list privileges for all users in the ibm.net and msu.edu domains. This has been an ongoing problem for several weeks and this is my second report. The SLIP port identifier and IP address are in the headers. It should not be difficult to determine who was using this dialup at the time the messages were posted. Appended are two of the latest batch. -- Michael C. Berch Postmaster and List Manager mcb@postmodern.com cc: List-Managers mailing list ------------- Received: from pilot02.cl.msu.edu (pilot02.cl.msu.edu [35.9.5.12]) by server.postmodern.com (8.7.5/mcb-960422) with ESMTP id DAA27710 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 03:32:17 -0700 (PDT) From: supervisor@medan.wasantara.net.id Received: from slip202-135-7-87.jk.id.ibm.net (slip202-135-7-87.jk.id.ibm.net [202.135.7.87]) by pilot02.cl.msu.edu (8.7.5/MSU-2.10) id GAA115635; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 06:32:13 -0400 Message-Id: <199608291032.GAA115635@pilot02.cl.msu.edu> DATE: 29 Agust 96 17:34:40 TO: majordomo@server.postmodern.com SUBJECT: subscribe jitr subscribe jitr Received: from pilot02.cl.msu.edu (pilot02.cl.msu.edu [35.9.5.12]) by server.postmodern.com (8.7.5/mcb-960422) with ESMTP id DAA27722 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 03:35:34 -0700 (PDT) From: orbandi@medan.wasantara.net.id Received: from slip202-135-7-87.jk.id.ibm.net (slip202-135-7-87.jk.id.ibm.net [202.135.7.87]) by pilot02.cl.msu.edu (8.7.5/MSU-2.10) id GAA115565; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 06:35:26 -0400 Message-Id: <199608291035.GAA115565@pilot02.cl.msu.edu> DATE: 29 Agust 96 17:37:53 TO: majordomo@server.postmodern.com SUBJECT: subscribe jitr subscribe jitr From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 29 17:16:51 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id QAA08345 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 16:18:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sunspot.tiac.net (sunspot.tiac.net [199.0.65.22]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id QAA08017 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 16:17:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from stanr@localhost) by sunspot.tiac.net (8.6.12/8.6.6.Beta9) id TAA18983; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 19:17:58 -0400 From: Stan Ryckman Message-Id: <199608292317.TAA18983@sunspot.tiac.net> Subject: Re: Subscription forgeries from ibm.net to net.id addresses To: mcb@postmodern.com Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 19:17:58 -0400 (EDT) Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: <32260AAB.31A6@postmodern.com> from "Michael C. Berch" at Aug 29, 96 02:25:02 pm Organization: Amber & Sneakers Fan Club X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > Watch out for forged subscriptions targeted at users in the net.id > (Indonesia) domain, particularly wasantara.net.id and idola.net.id. > There was a whole batch of them a few weeks ago, mostly aimed at groups > of music-related lists, and it seems to have started again. [... stuff from original headers:] > DATE: 29 Agust 96 17:34:40 [...] > DATE: 29 Agust 96 17:37:53 The fact that they didn't spell "August" correctly and didn't put a timezone in might make it possible to connect them with other things they might have done as well, even if the SLIP connection can't be mapped back to a login. Cheers, Stan. From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 29 18:00:26 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id RAA18905 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 17:47:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (mycroft.greatcircle.com [198.102.244.35]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id RAA16394 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 17:28:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.10/SMI-4.1/Brent-960123) id QAA09790; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 16:39:24 -0700 Received: from swcp.com(198.59.115.2) by mycroft via smap (V1.3mjr) id sma009785; Thu Aug 29 16:39:11 1996 Received: (from lazlo@localhost) by kitsune.swcp.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) id RAA17596 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 17:39:39 -0600 Message-Id: <199608292339.RAA17596@kitsune.swcp.com> Subject: Bandwidth reduction To: list-managers@greatcircle.com (lm) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 17:39:36 -0600 (MDT) From: "Lazlo Nibble" X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25 PGP3 *ALPHA*] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > Has anyone seen or heard of (or taken a guess at) the likely bandwidth use > reduction effect of encouraging posters to economise with sig files and > truncating/paraphrasing messages to which they are replying, first from a > list point of view and secondly from an overall Internet perspective? In these days of real-time streaming A/V over the Internet, sigs and quoting really aren't a bandwidth issue anymore. They're definitely an "annoyance to the people who have to read the messages" issue, though, and that's why my list guidelines mention them. -- ::: Lazlo (lazlo@swcp.com; http://www.swcp.com/lazlo) From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 29 18:05:59 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id RAA15487 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 17:21:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) id QAA11852 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 16:52:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from falcon.inetnebr.com (falcon.inetnebr.com [199.184.119.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id HAA01486 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 07:16:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from carrot.tssi.com (root@gateway.tssi.com [198.147.197.29]) by falcon.inetnebr.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id JAA07016 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 09:17:39 -0500 (CDT) Received: from pumpkin.tssi.com (carrot.tssi.com) by carrot.tssi.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with ESMTP id JAA25581 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 09:22:11 -0500 Received: (from pumpkin.tssi.com) by pumpkin.tssi.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) id JAA01347 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 09:15:37 -0500 From: Michael Nolan Message-ID: <199608291415.JAA01347@pumpkin.tssi.com> Subject: Re: PAML mail To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 09:15:37 -0500 (CDT) In-Reply-To: <199608290822.DAA19152@bonkers.taronga.com> from "Stephanie da Silva" at Aug 29, 96 03:22:09 am Reply-To: nolan@tssi.com X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > > If we caused you any hassle, please accept our apologies... but, if you don't > > want to get any requests for lists, why do you run a listserver? Lists of lists are a way of advertising our lists, but of course such advertising can be turned against the list (see below). I'm a little less sure why some/most list managers let their list of subscribers out. I don't, maily because I don't want to feed spammers or others building up lists of e-mail addresses, regardless of their intentions. (If someone wants to subscribe to my lists and over time build up a list of posters and their addresses, I can't do anything about that.) > >From past experience of list abuse, the act of accessing many mailing lists > with no intention of joining any of them is widely interpreted as a hostile > gesture. I recently had someone on AOL subscribe to my two (closed) lists, post a note about a list he was trying to start, at best tangentially related to the subject of my two lists, (two college sports teams) then unsubscribe, all in the same day. I'd call that hostile activity. -- Mike Nolan nolan@tssi.com From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 29 18:44:44 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id SAA24898 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 18:39:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sunspot.tiac.net (sunspot.tiac.net [199.0.65.22]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id SAA24889 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 18:39:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from stanr@localhost) by sunspot.tiac.net (8.6.12/8.6.6.Beta9) id VAA01400 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 21:39:58 -0400 From: Stan Ryckman Message-Id: <199608300139.VAA01400@sunspot.tiac.net> Subject: Strange bounces? To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 21:39:57 -0400 (EDT) Organization: Amber & Sneakers Fan Club X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi. I got two bounces from my previous post to this list; one of them follows below (with quote mark "|"). Anybody else posting to this list have that problem? Or could it possibly be due to the To: previous-poster and Cc: list-managers headers combination? The Bcc: to student5 and student4 was not inserted by me. The "whois" command shows qatraining.com to be in England, while postmodern.com is in California, so it seems unlikely these things are related. In any event, it's clear to me that *somebody* is violating the RFC's here. Thanks for any insight, Stan Ryckman (stanr@tiac.net) |From stanr@sunspot.tiac.net Thu Aug 29 20:24:17 1996 |Received: from smtp1.qatraining.com ([194.201.74.83]) by sunspot.tiac.net (8.6.12/8.6.6.Beta9) with SMTP id UAA25897 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 20:24:15 -0400 |Received: by smtp1.qatraining.com (IBM OS/2 SENDMAIL VERSION 1.3.17/2.12um) id AA0580; Fri, 30 Aug 96 00:24:02 -0400 |Message-Id: <9608300424.AA0580@smtp1.qatraining.com> |Received: from QATRAIN with "Lotus Notes Mail Gateway for SMTP" id | F14A4B3056C10E818025639500807382; Fri, 30 Aug 96 00:24:02 |To: Stan Ryckman |From: Mailer-Daemon@qatraining.com |Date: Fri, 30 Aug 96 00:24:02 |Subject: Returned mail |Mime-Version: 1.0 |Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="-- message ----" | |---- message ---- | |User student4 not listed in public Name & Address Book | |---- message ---- |Content-Type: Message/rfc822 |Content-Description: RFC822 | |To: mcb |cc: list-managers |bcc: student5 , student4 |From: Stan Ryckman |Date: 29 Aug 96 19:17:58 |Subject: Re: Subscription forgeries from ibm.net to net.id addresses |MIME-Version: 1.0 |Content-Type: Text/Plain | |> Watch out for forged subscriptions targeted at users in the net.id |> (Indonesia) domain, particularly wasantara.net.id and idola.net.id. |> There was a whole batch of them a few weeks ago, mostly aimed at groups |> of music-related lists, and it seems to have started again. | |[... stuff from original headers:] | |> DATE: 29 Agust 96 17:34:40 |[...] |> DATE: 29 Agust 96 17:37:53 | |The fact that they didn't spell "August" correctly and didn't put |a timezone in might make it possible to connect them with other |things they might have done as well, even if the SLIP connection |can't be mapped back to a login. | |Cheers, |Stan. | | |---- message ------ | From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 29 19:15:18 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id TAA00165 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 19:11:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from server.postmodern.com (server.postmodern.com [207.33.130.54]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id TAA00138 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 19:11:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 207.33.130.51 (derrida.postmodern.com [207.33.130.51]) by server.postmodern.com (8.7.5/mcb-960422) with SMTP id TAA29968; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 19:10:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <32264DB2.3127@postmodern.com> Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 19:11:21 -0700 From: "Michael C. Berch" Reply-To: mcb@postmodern.com Organization: Postmodern Consulting, California USA X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Macintosh; I; 68K) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stan Ryckman CC: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Strange bounces? References: <199608300139.VAA01400@sunspot.tiac.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Stan Ryckman wrote: > > Hi. I got two bounces from my previous post to this list; one of them > follows below (with quote mark "|"). > > Anybody else posting to this list have that problem? Or could it > possibly be due to the To: previous-poster and Cc: list-managers > headers combination? > > The Bcc: to student5 and student4 was not inserted by me. The > "whois" command shows qatraining.com to be in England, while > postmodern.com is in California, so it seems unlikely these things > are related. > > In any event, it's clear to me that *somebody* is violating the RFC's > here. It was a misconfigured mailer at qatraining.com, which is sending bounces to message originators instead of to the SMTP envelope-address. (A no-no, as we here are all aware.) I got the bounces when I posted my earlier message today, and went to log in at GreatCircle.COM to bounce the address off the list, only to find that the admin there had already submitted unsubscribes for them. I sent a complaint, and have blocked the domain from using Majordomo at GreatCircle (since I suspect they are using the "student" accounts to teach how Internet mailing lists work; a fine idea, but not on MY lists, thank you), so we should not be troubled with them in the future. -- Michael C. Berch mcb@postmodern.com From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 29 22:00:05 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id VAA29499 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 21:36:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.his.com (mail.his.com [205.177.25.9]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id VAA29466 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 21:36:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.177.25.174] (brad.his.com [205.177.25.174]) by mail.his.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id AAA11731; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 00:36:30 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199608300139.VAA01400@sunspot.tiac.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 00:07:41 -0400 To: Stan Ryckman , list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: Strange bounces? Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 9:39 PM -0400 8/29/1996, Stan Ryckman wrote: >In any event, it's clear to me that *somebody* is violating the RFC's >here. > >Thanks for any insight, >Stan Ryckman (stanr@tiac.net) > >|From stanr@sunspot.tiac.net Thu Aug 29 20:24:17 1996 >|Received: from smtp1.qatraining.com ([194.201.74.83]) by >sunspot.tiac.net (8.6.12/8.6.6.Beta9) with SMTP id UAA25897 for >; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 20:24:15 -0400 >|Received: by smtp1.qatraining.com (IBM OS/2 SENDMAIL VERSION >1.3.17/2.12um) id AA0580; Fri, 30 Aug 96 00:24:02 -0400 >|Message-Id: <9608300424.AA0580@smtp1.qatraining.com> >|Received: from QATRAIN with "Lotus Notes Mail Gateway for SMTP" id >| F14A4B3056C10E818025639500807382; Fri, 30 Aug 96 00:24:02 Here's your answer -- it's a particular piece of dreckage and bletchery called "Lotus Notes", which depends on another particular piece of dreckage and bletchery known as "IBM OS/2 sendmail". -- Brad Knowles, MIME/PGP: brad@his.com comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer finger brad@his.com for my PGP Public Keys and Geek Code The comp.mail.sendmail FAQ is at From list-managers-owner Thu Aug 29 22:05:18 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id VAA29457 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 21:36:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.his.com (mail.his.com [205.177.25.9]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id VAA29444 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 21:36:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.177.25.174] (brad.his.com [205.177.25.174]) by mail.his.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id AAA11715; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 00:36:19 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <9608291421.AA21126@smoe.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 00:03:28 -0400 To: jeffw@smoe.org (Jeff Wasilko), list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: Here's some more info for you.. (fwd) (PAML abuse) Cc: randal@movies.enet.dec.com Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 10:21 AM -0400 8/29/1996, Jeff Wasilko wrote: >I don't make a habit of forwarding personal email, but this >feels like a form letter and concerns all of us: > >Paul Randal, writes: >> From randal@movies.enet.dec.com Thu Aug 29 09:57:51 1996 >> Message-Id: <199608291357.PAA05996@vbormc.vbo.dec.com> >> Date: Thu, 29 Aug 96 15:58:24 MET DST >> From: "Paul Randal, " >> To: "jeffw@smoe.org"@vbormc.vbo.dec.com >> Apparently-To: jeffw@smoe.org >> Subject: Here's some more info for you.. [ ... deletia ... ] >> For the first point above, we've been pursuing gathering data from several >> public sources, one of which was the PAML list. Your site was contacted >> during our test run as a result of our analysis of that list. Again we >> apologise if this inconvenienced you. One other thing you should do -- review the policies of the maintainers of the PAML itself. I believe that you'll find that the kind of thing you are doing is expressly forbidden by their established policies. However, you should confirm that with the maintainers of PAML themselves. -- Brad Knowles, MIME/PGP: brad@his.com comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer finger brad@his.com for my PGP Public Keys and Geek Code The comp.mail.sendmail FAQ is at From list-managers-owner Fri Aug 30 04:00:00 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id DAA00725 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 03:45:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from en.com (en.com [204.89.181.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id DAA00695 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 03:45:22 -0700 (PDT) From: LiveTV@msn.com Received: from en.en.com (p6-ts1.en.net [207.78.11.165]) by en.com (8.7.4/8.7.4) with SMTP id GAA19892 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 06:48:21 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199608301048.GAA19892@en.com> Comments: Authenticated sender is Organization: Nipples n' Milk Group To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 06:48:13 -0400 Subject: Bounced Email X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I recently had a couple of files returned because the subscribers' mailbox was full. As always, when the bounce warning came back from the ISP, it contained the full text and all attachments of the original. When looking at the header of the returned email, I noticed these two lines: Errors-To: Content-Return: allowed Is there some way to prevent bounce warning messages from returning the entire contents? It seems to me to be a total waste of bandwidth, let alone the extra time that it takes me to retrieve the stuff. The last line is what got me thinking (a dangerous situation) that maybe something could be done to prevent it. Thanks Greg mailto:LiveTV@en.com From list-managers-owner Fri Aug 30 08:29:55 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id IAA20167 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 08:22:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imc.org (imc.org [165.227.249.12]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id IAA20149 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 08:22:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [165.227.113.247] (phoffman.sc.scruznet.com [165.227.113.247]) by imc.org (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id IAA23322 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 08:16:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199608301048.GAA19892@en.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 08:24:41 -0700 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Paul Hoffman Subject: Re: Bounced Email Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >Content-Return: allowed I would be very interested in finding out which SMTP server added this and if it is an option that can be turned off. --Paul Hoffman --Internet Mail Consortium From list-managers-owner Fri Aug 30 09:30:23 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id JAA25689 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 09:19:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huey.disney.com (huey.disney.com [204.128.192.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id JAA25681 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 09:19:46 -0700 (PDT) From: sullivan@fa.disney.com Received: from dalsdb (dalsdb.fa.disney.com [139.104.212.4]) by huey.disney.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA21305 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 09:15:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from oilspot.fa.disney.com by dalsdb with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #53) id m0uwWI7-000011C; Fri, 30 Aug 96 09:19 PDT Received: from higgins.fa.disney.com by oilspot.fa.disney.com with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #53) id m0uwWIA-0009D7C; Fri, 30 Aug 96 09:19 PDT Received: by higgins.fa.disney.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #53) id m0uwWIc-0005k7C; Fri, 30 Aug 96 09:20 PDT Message-Id: <9608300920.ZM5067@higgins> Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 09:20:01 -0700 References: <199608300800.BAA20439@miles.greatcircle.com> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.0 26oct94 MediaMail) To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: PAML mail Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > >From past experience of list abuse, the act of accessing many mailing lists > with no intention of joining any of them is widely interpreted as a hostile > gesture. > > The mailing list servers were not put there for your convenience or purpose, > whatever that may be (which you have yet to reveal). Jeez, some of you people are touchy. If you make your subscription list info available for someone to get to, don't be surprised if someone gets to it. Complain about loads placed on machines from queries like this but don't complain about people doing something that you've allowed them to do. You won't find anybody getting my subscriber lists because I don't make them available. Getting off soapbox and donning asbestos now... --- Michael Sullivan sullivan@fa.disney.com Walt Disney Feature Animation +1 818 560 8196 (voice) 500 S. Buena Vista St. +1 818 560 8290 (fax) Burbank, CA 91521-4870 From list-managers-owner Fri Aug 30 10:14:33 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id KAA29406 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 10:07:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from idyllmtn.com (ayla.idyllmtn.com [206.16.238.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id KAA29398 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 10:07:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gates.idyllmtn.com by idyllmtn.com (8.6.8/Idyllmtn) id KAA28246; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 10:05:17 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19960830171933.00854ea8@mail.idyllmtn.com> X-Sender: kynn@mail.idyllmtn.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 10:19:33 -0700 To: sullivan@fa.disney.com From: Kynn Bartlett Subject: Re: PAML mail Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 09:20 AM 8/30/96 -0700, sullivan@fa.disney.com wrote: >Jeez, some of you people are touchy. If you make your subscription list >info available for someone to get to, don't be surprised if someone gets to >it. Complain about loads placed on machines from queries like this but don't >complain about people doing something that you've allowed them to do. You >won't find anybody getting my subscriber lists because I don't make them >available. This is sorta like saying, "Sheesh, if you make your email address available (by, say, posting to this list) then don't get surprised when you get a flood of commercial email advertisements in return." Your argument above is akin to the idea that if I leave my window unlocked, it's okay for someone to break in and steal all my stuff. -- /\ /\ /\ /\ Kynn Bartlett / kynn@idyllmtn.com / \ / \/ \ / \ Idyll Mountain Internet / \ //\ /\ \ / \ '_| _` // \/ \__\ '_| _` Milestone NOW! idyllmtn.com/~kynn/icons.html From list-managers-owner Fri Aug 30 11:44:31 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id LAA06401 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 11:34:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from biome.bio.dfo.ca (biome.BIO.dfo.ca [142.2.20.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id LAA06384 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 11:34:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by biome.bio.dfo.ca (920330.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO) for List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM id AA22214; Fri, 30 Aug 96 15:31:59 -0300 From: bill@biome.bio.dfo.ca (Bill Silvert) Message-Id: <9608301831.AA22214@biome.bio.dfo.ca> Subject: Is the lists command legit? To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 15:31:35 -0300 (ADT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk This is really getting to be a heated debate... >Your argument above is akin to the idea that if I leave my window unlocked, >it's okay for someone to break in and steal all my stuff. for example. Come on, finding out who is on a publicly accessible list is not exactly theft. Keep in mind that the problem is not that people know who is on the list, but that they MAY abuse the information. Therefore a better analogy is that if someone is looking in a telephone directory, they MAY be using it to call people at random to harrass them or to find out if they are away so that their homes can be burgled. But possession of a telephone directory is not a crime. Let me pose a question, and see how list managers feel about this. I'm a biological oceanographer and don't subscribe to any lists in physical oceanography, but I have a lot of colleagues in physical oceanography and often want to contact them for legitimate scientific reasons. Am I commiting a serious abuse if I look at the subscriber lists in physical oceanography to see if I can find Email address of my colleagues? -- Bill Silvert, Habitat Ecology Section, Bedford Institute of Oceanography, P. O. Box 1006, Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, CANADA B2Y 4A2, Tel. (902)426-1577 From list-managers-owner Fri Aug 30 12:15:11 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id LAA08874 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 11:58:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailbox.neosoft.com (mailbox.neosoft.com [206.109.1.16]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id LAA08849 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 11:58:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bonkers.taronga.com (root@bonkers.neosoft.com [206.109.2.48]) by mailbox.neosoft.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA02316 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 13:58:16 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from arielle@localhost) by bonkers.taronga.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id NAA22744 for List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 13:52:06 -0500 From: arielle@taronga.com (Stephanie da Silva) Message-Id: <199608301852.NAA22744@bonkers.taronga.com> Subject: Re: PAML mail To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 13:52:06 -0500 (CDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk sullivan@fa.disney.com: > Jeez, some of you people are touchy. If you make your subscription list > info available for someone to get to, don't be surprised if someone gets to > it. Complain about loads placed on machines from queries like this but don't > complain about people doing something that you've allowed them to do. You > won't find anybody getting my subscriber lists because I don't make them > available. I don't have my user lists publicly readable, but I still think it's kind of rude to go around querying a lot of list servers. They used a bot, this probably means we're now going to have to install robot.txt files for our listservers as well as our web servers. At any rate, the entities involved have contacted me about the situation and I'm thinking about how I'm going to phrase my response. From list-managers-owner Fri Aug 30 14:29:50 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id OAA17711 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 14:20:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shoreside.com (shoreside.com [206.40.34.81]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id OAA17692 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 14:20:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from jlick@localhost) by shoreside.com (8.7.3/8.7.3) id OAA23635; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 14:19:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 14:19:32 -0700 (PDT) From: James Lick To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Lotus Notes In-Reply-To: <199608300800.BAA20439@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've found it very effective to block anything that's passed through a Lotus Notes server. e.g.: if(grep(/Lotus Notes Mail Gateway for SMTP/,@header)) ... [reject article] I've been in contact with some sites regarding this policy. They claim that Lotus is refusing to fix their gateway. -- James Lick -- jlick@drivel.com -- http://drivel.com/jlick/ -- From list-managers-owner Fri Aug 30 16:06:43 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id QAA08381 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 16:01:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cantec.com ([206.31.250.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id QAA08365 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 16:01:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 16:01:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199608302301.QAA08365@miles.greatcircle.com> Received: from www by cantec.com with SMTP (IPAD 1.1g) id 4757100 ; Fri, 30 Aug 96 19:03:03 UTC X-Sender: dbigham@cantec.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Dave Bigham Subject: Re: PAML mail Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 10:19 AM 8/30/96 -0700, you wrote: >This is sorta like saying, "Sheesh, if you make your email address available >(by, say, posting to this list) then don't get surprised when you get a flood >of commercial email advertisements in return." > >Your argument above is akin to the idea that if I leave my window unlocked, >it's okay for someone to break in and steal all my stuff. > No, it's not OK. But, knowing there are crooks around who will enter your house if you leave it unlocked, you shouldn't be suprised if that happens. Dave Bigham From list-managers-owner Fri Aug 30 16:11:15 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id PAA08239 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 15:59:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cantec.com ([206.31.250.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id PAA08225 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 15:59:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 15:59:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199608302259.PAA08225@miles.greatcircle.com> Received: from www by cantec.com with SMTP (IPAD 1.1g) id 4756900 ; Fri, 30 Aug 96 19:00:40 UTC X-Sender: dbigham@cantec.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Dave Bigham Subject: Re: PAML mail Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 09:20 AM 8/30/96 -0700, you wrote: >Jeez, some of you people are touchy. If you make your subscription list >info available for someone to get to, don't be surprised if someone gets to >it. Complain about loads placed on machines from queries like this but don't >complain about people doing something that you've allowed them to do. You >won't find anybody getting my subscriber lists because I don't make them >available. > >Getting off soapbox and donning asbestos now... >--- >Michael Sullivan sullivan@fa.disney.com Why should you have to don asbestos? You're right. Complaining about members fo the general public doing things which are allowed to be done shows lazy or non-existant list management. Dave Bigham From list-managers-owner Fri Aug 30 17:49:30 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id RAA12577 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 17:39:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sara.zia.com ([204.30.30.20]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with ESMTP id RAA12557 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 17:38:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lcfw.zia.com ([204.30.30.185]) by sara.zia.com (post.office MTA v1.9.3 ID# 0-12328) with SMTP id AAA351 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 18:36:56 -0600 Received: by lcfw.zia.com with Microsoft Mail id <01BB96B3.4665A700@lcfw.zia.com>; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 20:39:00 -0400 Message-ID: <01BB96B3.4665A700@lcfw.zia.com> From: fwaid@sara.zia.com (Fred M. Waid) To: "'List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM'" Subject: RE: PAML mail Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 20:38:58 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk We manage a number of lists with 1000's of messages per day. Much of = this present discussion appears to be centered around misunderstandings = about how lists can be managed. With any list server software you should be able to accomplish at least = the following: 1. Hide any mailing list from the list command 2. Allow any user to set themselves to be concealed from review = commands 3. Make any list moderated 4. Restrict who can post to a list 5. Allow/disallow subscriptions to a list 6. Allow/disallow specific commands such as get, digest, review, etc. With these features you have the ability to control the type of access = granted to any list you manage. We even have some of our lists which = are for kids and are managed by 10 to 13 year olds and they do it quite = successfully and professionally. Fred=20 ---------- From: Dave Bigham[SMTP:dbigham@cantec.com] Sent: Friday, August 30, 1996 11:59 AM To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: PAML mail At 09:20 AM 8/30/96 -0700, you wrote: >Jeez, some of you people are touchy. If you make your subscription = list >info available for someone to get to, don't be surprised if someone = gets to >it. Complain about loads placed on machines from queries like this but = don't >complain about people doing something that you've allowed them to do. = You >won't find anybody getting my subscriber lists because I don't make = them >available. > >Getting off soapbox and donning asbestos now... >--- >Michael Sullivan sullivan@fa.disney.com Why should you have to don asbestos? You're right. Complaining about = members fo the general public doing things which are allowed to be done shows = lazy or non-existant list management. Dave Bigham From list-managers-owner Sat Aug 31 02:04:18 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id CAA09459 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 31 Aug 1996 02:01:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bbfm.di.com (bbfm.di.com [207.71.205.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id CAA09419 for ; Sat, 31 Aug 1996 02:00:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tomorrow by bbfm.di.com (8.6.10/TD-1.22) with SMTP id BAA18488 for on Sat, 31 Aug 1996 01:28:18 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0b11.32.19960831015751.00a7ceb0@mail.di.com> X-Sender: today@mail.di.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0b11 (32) Date: Sat, 31 Aug 1996 01:57:53 -0700 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Todd Day Subject: Re: Dec's PAML Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >Jeez, some of you people are touchy. If you make your subscription list >info available for someone to get to, don't be surprised if someone gets to >it. I think the main fear of those who have expressed concern is that DEC is planning a new service based upon either the subscriber lists or the content of the lists itself. Only DEC knows for sure what they are doing, but one way or another, no matter what they do, it is going to upset some of the list managers out there. Personally, I think Alta Vista is the best search engine out there, but I'm not so sure I would want it prowling through the archives of my list. I certainly wouldn't want it to get ahold of my subscriber list. List managers have gotten screwed big time in the past by advertisers and pranksters doing things similar to what DEC did on their info gathering trip. DEC might have only good intentions, but I don't think you can blame people list managers for being a little jumpy. If DEC had had the common decency to let list managers (and "list-managers") know what was happening beforehand, they could have alleviated the entire problem. -todd- From list-managers-owner Sat Aug 31 02:19:21 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id CAA10039 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 31 Aug 1996 02:06:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.his.com (mail.his.com [205.177.25.9]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id CAA09983 for ; Sat, 31 Aug 1996 02:05:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.177.25.174] (brad.his.com [205.177.25.174]) by mail.his.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id FAA05726; Sat, 31 Aug 1996 05:05:09 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <199608300800.BAA20439@miles.greatcircle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 31 Aug 1996 04:56:55 -0400 To: James Lick , List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: Lotus Notes Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 5:19 PM -0400 8/30/1996, James Lick wrote: >I've found it very effective to block anything that's passed through a >Lotus Notes server. e.g.: > > if(grep(/Lotus Notes Mail Gateway for SMTP/,@header)) ... [reject article] > >I've been in contact with some sites regarding this policy. They claim >that Lotus is refusing to fix their gateway. It doesn't surprise me. They've been saying now for three or four years that the "real" solution is just around the corner, the same old BS they pulled with the cc:Mail SMTPLink product. They bought Soft*Switch (the company) as a supposed answer to this problem, and then discovered how bad the product really is (it earned the nickname "Soft*Glitch" at my previous employer -- we were glad to turn off that multi-million dollar beast and work on our own solution that hid SMTPLink behind a Unix box that only cost tens of $K). New owner (IBM), same old tired song. -- Brad Knowles, MIME/PGP: brad@his.com comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer finger brad@his.com for my PGP Public Keys and Geek Code The comp.mail.sendmail FAQ is at From list-managers-owner Sat Aug 31 15:49:23 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id PAA24821 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 31 Aug 1996 15:47:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from maildeliver1.tiac.net (maildeliver1.tiac.net [199.0.65.213]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id PAA24814 for ; Sat, 31 Aug 1996 15:47:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from worldmachine.com (worldmachine.com [204.215.133.237]) by maildeliver1.tiac.net (8.6.12/8.7.4) with ESMTP id SAA05184 for ; Sat, 31 Aug 1996 18:47:15 -0400 Received: (from eric@localhost) by worldmachine.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id SAA10231 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sat, 31 Aug 1996 18:51:23 -0400 From: "Eric J. Hansen" Message-Id: <199608312251.SAA10231@worldmachine.com> Subject: software to 'prettify' incoming msgs? To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Sat, 31 Aug 1996 18:51:22 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Does anyone know of some software that reformats and generally 'prettifies' incoming mail messages? I know that alot of list managers do this by hand, and then even more couldn't care less (but obviously I'm one of the former). Even something that generally cleans things up would be better than nothing... although my current SmartList "custom addon" script does some of this (like wrapping long lines, collapsing multiple blank lines, etc...), I'd like something better. If nothing else comes along, I'll probably try to write a more robust and configurable package that will work with other MLM's. Regards, Eric Level 42 Digest, Incognito Digest, Go West Digest -- Eric J. Hansen .............................. http://www.worldmachine.com/eric Developer, Worldmachine Technologies ............ mailto:eric@worldmachine.com From list-managers-owner Sat Aug 31 18:19:21 1996 Received: (majordom@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.1-lists/Lists-960417-1) id SAA00891 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 31 Aug 1996 18:11:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sunspot.tiac.net (sunspot.tiac.net [199.0.65.22]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.7.4/Miles-951221-1) with SMTP id SAA00873 for ; Sat, 31 Aug 1996 18:10:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from stanr@localhost) by sunspot.tiac.net (8.6.12/8.6.6.Beta9) id VAA19052; Sat, 31 Aug 1996 21:10:41 -0400 From: Stan Ryckman Message-Id: <199609010110.VAA19052@sunspot.tiac.net> Subject: Re: Bounced Email To: LiveTV@msn.com Date: Sat, 31 Aug 1996 21:10:41 -0400 (EDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <199608301048.GAA19892@en.com> from "LiveTV@msn.com" at Aug 30, 96 06:48:13 am Organization: Amber & Sneakers Fan Club X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk LiveTV@msn.com wrote: > I recently had a couple of files returned because the subscribers' > mailbox was full. As always, when the bounce warning came back from > the ISP, it contained the full text and all attachments of the > original. > > When looking at the header of the returned email, I noticed these two > lines: > > Errors-To: > Content-Return: allowed > > Is there some way to prevent bounce warning messages from returning > the entire contents? It seems to me to be a total waste of bandwidth, > let alone the extra time that it takes me to retrieve the stuff. > > The last line is what got me thinking (a dangerous situation) that > maybe something could be done to prevent it. If interested, you might want to check out RFC 1891 (which isn't final yet). It describes an SMTP protocol to allow this sort of thing (look for the word RET). Also of interest to listowners, look for the word NOTIFY, which will allow bypass of those silly "mail delayed for 4 hours"-type messages. Unfortunately, this particular RFC doesn't address how that will get into SMTP from the original sender, i.e., by headers, and so it won't do everybody a lot of good really soon, although it may help those lists which directly speak SMTP (once they write the appropriate software upgrade). RFC 1892, 1893, and 1894 may also be of interest; they give a "standard" form of bounce message (referred to there as a DSN, or Delivery Status Notification) which should eventually improve list owners' lives. About all else I can add is a URL for RFC 1891: http://andrew2.andrew.cmu.edu/rfc/rfc1891.html (not even sure if it's the latest). It has links to 1892-1894. Hope that helps. Cheers, Stan.