From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Dec 1 14:39:37 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from avas3 (avas3.olemiss.edu [130.74.120.13]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 090CC32C423 for ; Thu, 1 Dec 2005 14:39:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from willow.olemiss.edu (willow [172.16.1.9]) by avas3 (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id jB1MdYXK017810 for ; Thu, 1 Dec 2005 16:39:34 -0600 (envelope-from tpirim@willow.olemiss.edu) Received: from willow.olemiss.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by willow.olemiss.edu (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.2) with ESMTP id jB1MdXVh019426 for ; Thu, 1 Dec 2005 16:39:33 -0600 (CST) Received: from localhost (tpirim@localhost) by willow.olemiss.edu (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.2/Submit) with ESMTP id jB1MdXCf019423 for ; Thu, 1 Dec 2005 16:39:33 -0600 (CST) Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 16:39:33 -0600 (CST) From: Taner Pirim To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: The daily digest for Majordomo-Users V6 #567 In-Reply-To: <20051130112933.D803032C5BB@mycroft.greatcircle.com> Message-ID: References: <20051130112933.D803032C5BB@mycroft.greatcircle.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-PMX-Version: 4.7.1.128075, Antispam-Engine: 2.1.0.0, Antispam-Data: 2005.12.1.27 X-Archive-Number: 200512/1 X-Sequence-Number: 5232 Dear Users, The digest of mine is working fine but whenever I send an email I receive a Mail Delivery Subsystem email saying: Receiving 2 550 5.0.0 /usr/local/listserv/archives/digestest... Can't create output I did check the the permissions, the file is set for 775 with majordom as owner and group. Please help... Sincerely, Taner On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com wrote: > The daily digest for Majordomo-Users > Volume 6 : Issue 567 : "text" Format > > Messages in this Issue: > No Digest? > Re: No Digest? > Re: No Digest? > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 16:24:24 +0100 > From: "W. van Eis" > Cc: > Subject: No Digest? > Message-ID: <021301c5f4f8$fb4b25c0$6a01a8c0@laptop> > > Seems like my Majordomo list doesn't send out digests. What could be the > problem? > > Regards, > Wop > > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 07:35:29 -0800 > From: "Peter P. Benac" > To: > Subject: Re: No Digest? > Message-ID: <200511291535.jATFZYxQ030357@atlantis.emacolet.com> > > A whole lot more information would be nice? How are your aliases set up? > do you have a list config and a digest config? What do you have for setting > for digest_maxdays and digest_maxlines? Do you have the digest in cron? > > What version of MD? > > Regards, > Pete > ---- > Peter P. Benac, CCNA > Emacolet Networking Services, Inc > Providing Network and Systems Project Management and Installation and Web > Hosting. > Phone: 919-618-2557 > Web: http://www.emacolet.com > Need quick reliable Systems or Network Management advice visit > http://www.nmsusers.org > > To have principles... > First have courage.. With principles comes integrity!!! > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com > > [mailto:majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com] On Behalf Of W. van Eis > > Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 07:24 > > Cc: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com > > Subject: No Digest? > > > > Seems like my Majordomo list doesn't send out digests. What > > could be the > > problem? > > > > Regards, > > Wop > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 07:54:20 -0800 > From: "Peter P. Benac" > To: "'W. van Eis'" > Cc: , > Subject: Re: No Digest? > Message-ID: <200511291554.jATFsR9o030719@atlantis.emacolet.com> > > The aliases are part of the underlying mail transport agents configuration. > You will need to talk to your provider to ensure they are setup to digest > the incoming messages. If messages are not being digested then there won't > be a digest. > > The digest config is in the same place as your regular list config. > > Again you will need to speak to your provider to ensure Majordomo is setup > correctly for digests. If I was a betting man I would bet they are not!!! > > Regards, > Pete > ---- > Peter P. Benac, CCNA > Emacolet Networking Services, Inc > Providing Network and Systems Project Management and Installation and Web > Hosting. > Phone: 919-618-2557 > Web: http://www.emacolet.com > Need quick reliable Systems or Network Management advice visit > http://www.nmsusers.org > > To have principles... > First have courage.. With principles comes integrity!!! > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: W. van Eis [mailto:wop@vaneis.nl] > > Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 07:47 > > To: ppbenac@emacolet.com > > Cc: jeroen@flexwebhosting.nl > > Subject: Re: No Digest? > > > > > > >A whole lot more information would be nice? How are your > > aliases set up? > > > do you have a list config and a digest config? What do you have for > > > setting > > > for digest_maxdays and digest_maxlines? Do you have the > > digest in cron? > > > > > > What version of MD? > > > > > > Regards, > > > Pete > > > > Hi Pete, > > > > digest_maxdays=2 and digest_maxlines=100 > > > > Where can i find the digest config? And what do you mean by > > the aliases? > > Must there be cron jobs for digests? Where using Majordom > > through a admin > > panel so we don't have dirct acces to the file's > > > > Regards, > > Wop > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > End of [majordomo-users] The daily digest for Majordomo-Users V6 #567 > ********** > From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Dec 1 19:00:52 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from tomts10-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts10.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.54]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABD7632C20E for ; Thu, 1 Dec 2005 19:00:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from acer.sympatico.ca ([65.95.139.92]) by tomts10-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.10 201-253-122-130-110-20040306) with ESMTP id <20051202030049.YGQM26102.tomts10-srv.bellnexxia.net@acer.sympatico.ca> for ; Thu, 1 Dec 2005 22:00:49 -0500 Message-Id: <5.2.1.1.0.20051201215901.02e70570@pop6.sympatico.ca> X-Sender: b1wudu74@pop6.sympatico.ca X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.1 Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2005 22:00:42 -0500 To: From: Frank Bax Subject: Re: Problems with duplicate messages In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Originating-IP: [0] X-Archive-Number: 200512/2 X-Sequence-Number: 5233 At 07:03 AM 11/30/05, Doty, Robert wrote: >I am using Majordomo 1.94, and have a single list file and >configuration. I have 1200 users subscribed to the list. I periodically >sort the list by domain name to speed up mail delivery. The problem I am >having is that some users complain of duplicate copies of each message, >sometimes 2,3 even 4 copies of the same message come through. I have >confirmed that there is no potential for loops in the alias file. The >users complaining are in the list file only once. I checked my maillog >file and for each message that is send via smtp, their e-mail shows up >only once. I am at a total loss! I have read that smtp servers sometimes >have timeout issues and this causes duplicate messages but I would not >expect this to be the cause since it happens to the same users all the >time. Does anyone out there have any ideas? Have the users save their duplicate messages, then review the "received" headers to see how/why they got each copy. From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Dec 1 19:37:07 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from S1.cableone.net (s1.cableone.net [24.116.0.227]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F46C32C1A2 for ; Thu, 1 Dec 2005 19:37:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.78] (unverified [69.92.133.208]) by S1.cableone.net (CableOne SMTP Service S1) with ESMTP id 38891759 for multiple; Thu, 01 Dec 2005 20:37:26 -0700 Message-ID: <438FC178.7030408@sonny.org> Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2005 21:37:28 -0600 From: Daniel Liston User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; SunOS i86pc; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20041221 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: The daily digest for Majordomo-Users V6 #567 References: <20051130112933.D803032C5BB@mycroft.greatcircle.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-NotAscii: charset=us-ascii; X-IP-stats: Incoming Last 11, First 10, in=1, out=0, spam=0 X-External-IP: 69.92.133.208 X-Abuse-Info: Send abuse complaints to abuse@cableone.net X-Archive-Number: 200512/3 X-Sequence-Number: 5234 The "Mail Delivery Subsystem" and 550 5.0.0 messages indicate there is are a problem with your MTA and the permissions it needs to be able to write to the digest directory. Since this directory is owned by majordomo with user and group write access, all I can ask is if your MTA user is a member of your majordomo group? Dan Liston Taner Pirim wrote: > Dear Users, > The digest of mine is working fine but whenever I send an email I > receive a Mail Delivery Subsystem email saying: > Receiving 2 > 550 5.0.0 /usr/local/listserv/archives/digestest... Can't create output > > I did check the the permissions, the file is set for 775 with majordom as > owner and group. Please help... > Sincerely, > Taner > > > On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com wrote: > > >>The daily digest for Majordomo-Users >>Volume 6 : Issue 567 : "text" Format >> >>Messages in this Issue: >> No Digest? >> Re: No Digest? >> Re: No Digest? >> >>---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >>Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 16:24:24 +0100 >>From: "W. van Eis" >>Cc: >>Subject: No Digest? >>Message-ID: <021301c5f4f8$fb4b25c0$6a01a8c0@laptop> >> >>Seems like my Majordomo list doesn't send out digests. What could be the >>problem? >> >>Regards, >>Wop >> >> >> >>------------------------------ >> >>Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 07:35:29 -0800 >>From: "Peter P. Benac" >>To: >>Subject: Re: No Digest? >>Message-ID: <200511291535.jATFZYxQ030357@atlantis.emacolet.com> >> >>A whole lot more information would be nice? How are your aliases set up? >>do you have a list config and a digest config? What do you have for setting >>for digest_maxdays and digest_maxlines? Do you have the digest in cron? >> >>What version of MD? >> >>Regards, >>Pete >>---- >>Peter P. Benac, CCNA >>Emacolet Networking Services, Inc >>Providing Network and Systems Project Management and Installation and Web >>Hosting. >>Phone: 919-618-2557 >>Web: http://www.emacolet.com >>Need quick reliable Systems or Network Management advice visit >>http://www.nmsusers.org >> >>To have principles... >> First have courage.. With principles comes integrity!!! >> >> >> >> >> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com >>>[mailto:majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com] On Behalf Of W. van Eis >>>Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 07:24 >>>Cc: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com >>>Subject: No Digest? >>> >>>Seems like my Majordomo list doesn't send out digests. What >>>could be the >>>problem? >>> >>>Regards, >>>Wop >>> >>> >> >> >>------------------------------ >> >>Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 07:54:20 -0800 >>From: "Peter P. Benac" >>To: "'W. van Eis'" >>Cc: , >>Subject: Re: No Digest? >>Message-ID: <200511291554.jATFsR9o030719@atlantis.emacolet.com> >> >>The aliases are part of the underlying mail transport agents configuration. >>You will need to talk to your provider to ensure they are setup to digest >>the incoming messages. If messages are not being digested then there won't >>be a digest. >> >>The digest config is in the same place as your regular list config. >> >>Again you will need to speak to your provider to ensure Majordomo is setup >>correctly for digests. If I was a betting man I would bet they are not!!! >> >>Regards, >>Pete >>---- >>Peter P. Benac, CCNA >>Emacolet Networking Services, Inc >>Providing Network and Systems Project Management and Installation and Web >>Hosting. >>Phone: 919-618-2557 >>Web: http://www.emacolet.com >>Need quick reliable Systems or Network Management advice visit >>http://www.nmsusers.org >> >>To have principles... >> First have courage.. With principles comes integrity!!! >> >> >> >> >> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: W. van Eis [mailto:wop@vaneis.nl] >>>Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 07:47 >>>To: ppbenac@emacolet.com >>>Cc: jeroen@flexwebhosting.nl >>>Subject: Re: No Digest? >>> >>> >>> >>>>A whole lot more information would be nice? How are your >>> >>>aliases set up? >>> >>>>do you have a list config and a digest config? What do you have for >>>>setting >>>>for digest_maxdays and digest_maxlines? Do you have the >>> >>>digest in cron? >>> >>>>What version of MD? >>>> >>>>Regards, >>>>Pete >>> >>>Hi Pete, >>> >>>digest_maxdays=2 and digest_maxlines=100 >>> >>>Where can i find the digest config? And what do you mean by >>>the aliases? >>>Must there be cron jobs for digests? Where using Majordom >>>through a admin >>>panel so we don't have dirct acces to the file's >>> >>>Regards, >>>Wop >>> >>> >> >> >>------------------------------ >> >>End of [majordomo-users] The daily digest for Majordomo-Users V6 #567 >>********** >> From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Fri Dec 2 05:37:05 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from wbmler1.mail.xerox.com (wbmler1.mail.xerox.com [13.13.138.216]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD53532C6BD for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2005 05:33:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from wbmlir1.mail.xerox.com (wbmlir1.mail.xerox.com [13.131.8.221]) by wbmler1.mail.xerox.com (8.13.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id jB2Di2PX016293 for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2005 08:44:03 -0500 Received: from wbmlir1.mail.xerox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wbmlir1.mail.xerox.com (8.13.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id jB2DhWX3013246 for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2005 08:43:32 -0500 Received: from usa0300gw02.na.xerox.net (usa0300gw02.na.xerox.net [13.129.0.42]) by wbmlir1.mail.xerox.com (8.13.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id jB2DhJgT013100 for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2005 08:43:32 -0500 Received: from usa0300ms02.na.xerox.net ([13.135.34.11]) by usa0300gw02.na.xerox.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Fri, 2 Dec 2005 08:43:07 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: Problems with duplicate messages Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 08:43:20 -0500 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Problems with duplicate messages Thread-Index: AcX27Q5tYFeuNrH+Rh+lP8GQ+W43sAAWTCMw From: "Doty, Robert" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Dec 2005 13:43:07.0386 (UTC) FILETIME=[53B1CDA0:01C5F746] X-Archive-Number: 200512/4 X-Sequence-Number: 5235 Headers are identical on the duplicate messages. Does this indicate a mail server (EXCHANGE) issue? Thanks, Rob -----Original Message----- From: majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com [mailto:majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com] On Behalf Of Frank Bax Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2005 10:01 PM To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Problems with duplicate messages At 07:03 AM 11/30/05, Doty, Robert wrote: >I am using Majordomo 1.94, and have a single list file and=20 >configuration. I have 1200 users subscribed to the list. I periodically=20 >sort the list by domain name to speed up mail delivery. The problem I am=20 >having is that some users complain of duplicate copies of each message, >sometimes 2,3 even 4 copies of the same message come through. I have=20 >confirmed that there is no potential for loops in the alias file. The=20 >users complaining are in the list file only once. I checked my maillog >file and for each message that is send via smtp, their e-mail shows up=20 >only once. I am at a total loss! I have read that smtp servers sometimes=20 >have timeout issues and this causes duplicate messages but I would not=20 >expect this to be the cause since it happens to the same users all the=20 >time. Does anyone out there have any ideas? Have the users save their duplicate messages, then review the "received" headers to see how/why they got each copy. From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Fri Dec 2 09:14:40 2005 X-Original-To: Majordomo-Users@greatcircle.com Received: from tomts20-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts20.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.74]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2698F32C1CB for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2005 09:14:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from acer.sympatico.ca ([65.95.139.92]) by tomts20-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.10 201-253-122-130-110-20040306) with ESMTP id <20051202171433.IRW26550.tomts20-srv.bellnexxia.net@acer.sympatico.ca> for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2005 12:14:33 -0500 Message-Id: <5.2.1.1.0.20051202120745.037559b0@pop6.sympatico.ca> X-Sender: b1wudu74@pop6.sympatico.ca X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.1 Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 12:14:15 -0500 To: Majordomo-Users@greatcircle.com From: Frank Bax Subject: Re: Problems with duplicate messages In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Originating-IP: [0] X-Archive-Number: 200512/5 X-Sequence-Number: 5236 Every message is *exactly* the same, not even one byte different? I've never seen that before. Are all messages in user's inbox - or other folders? Does user have any filters that say *copy* message - which would *create* duplicates. I *think* if server sends more than once there *should* be a record of it, but I've never even *seen* an Exchange server, never mind know anything about what it might do. Here's what I would do next... Send another message that you think will be duplicated, check the users mailbox on server *before* they download the message to their own machine. Then have user check for messages and see *when* message is duplicated. At 08:43 AM 12/2/05, Doty, Robert wrote: >Headers are identical on the duplicate messages. Does this indicate a >mail server (EXCHANGE) issue? > >Thanks, > >Rob > >-----Original Message----- >From: majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com >[mailto:majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com] On Behalf Of Frank Bax >Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2005 10:01 PM >To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com >Subject: Re: Problems with duplicate messages > >At 07:03 AM 11/30/05, Doty, Robert wrote: > > >I am using Majordomo 1.94, and have a single list file and > >configuration. I have 1200 users subscribed to the list. I >periodically > >sort the list by domain name to speed up mail delivery. The problem I >am > >having is that some users complain of duplicate copies of each message, > > >sometimes 2,3 even 4 copies of the same message come through. I have > >confirmed that there is no potential for loops in the alias file. The > >users complaining are in the list file only once. I checked my maillog > > >file and for each message that is send via smtp, their e-mail shows up > >only once. I am at a total loss! I have read that smtp servers >sometimes > >have timeout issues and this causes duplicate messages but I would not > >expect this to be the cause since it happens to the same users all the > >time. Does anyone out there have any ideas? > > > >Have the users save their duplicate messages, then review the "received" > >headers to see how/why they got each copy. From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Fri Dec 2 09:24:16 2005 X-Original-To: Majordomo-Users@greatcircle.com Received: from atlantis.emacolet.com (atlantis.emacolet.com [66.166.78.85]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BEEF32C1EF for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2005 09:24:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from akelalt (c-67-181-54-30.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [67.181.54.30]) (authenticated bits=0) by atlantis.emacolet.com (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id jB2HOAl6008888; Fri, 2 Dec 2005 09:24:10 -0800 Message-Id: <200512021724.jB2HOAl6008888@atlantis.emacolet.com> Reply-To: From: "Peter P. Benac" To: "'Frank Bax'" , Subject: Re: Problems with duplicate messages Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 09:24:03 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 Thread-Index: AcX3Y+s2P+q13RoyTmicqH/FNjPsPQAAMH2A In-reply-to: <5.2.1.1.0.20051202120745.037559b0@pop6.sympatico.ca> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.53 on 192.168.0.253 X-Archive-Number: 200512/6 X-Sequence-Number: 5237 To be add to this I had a similar issue last week on the lists that I host. It turned out to be an issue with Yahoo. This included sbcglobal.net. Moral of the story here you need to check the Exchange Logs to see if the message came in as a duplicate. When I checked my sendmail logs I noticed that Yahoo was sending the same message two times, mere seconds apart. The issue as corrected itself, but it was frustrating. ---- Peter P. Benac, CCNA Emacolet Networking Services, Inc Providing Network and Systems Project Management and Installation and Web Hosting. Phone: 919-618-2557 Web: http://www.emacolet.com Need quick reliable Systems or Network Management advice visit http://www.nmsusers.org To have principles... First have courage.. With principles comes integrity!!! > -----Original Message----- > From: majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com > [mailto:majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com] On Behalf Of Frank Bax > Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 09:14 > To: Majordomo-Users@greatcircle.com > Subject: Re: Problems with duplicate messages > > Every message is *exactly* the same, not even one byte > different? I've > never seen that before. Are all messages in user's inbox - or other > folders? Does user have any filters that say *copy* message > - which would > *create* duplicates. I *think* if server sends more than once there > *should* be a record of it, but I've never even *seen* an > Exchange server, > never mind know anything about what it might do. > > Here's what I would do next... Send another message that you > think will be > duplicated, check the users mailbox on server *before* they > download the > message to their own machine. Then have user check for > messages and see > *when* message is duplicated. > > > > At 08:43 AM 12/2/05, Doty, Robert wrote: > > >Headers are identical on the duplicate messages. Does this > indicate a > >mail server (EXCHANGE) issue? > > > >Thanks, > > > >Rob > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com > >[mailto:majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com] On Behalf Of Frank Bax > >Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2005 10:01 PM > >To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com > >Subject: Re: Problems with duplicate messages > > > >At 07:03 AM 11/30/05, Doty, Robert wrote: > > > > >I am using Majordomo 1.94, and have a single list file and > > >configuration. I have 1200 users subscribed to the list. I > >periodically > > >sort the list by domain name to speed up mail delivery. > The problem I > >am > > >having is that some users complain of duplicate copies of > each message, > > > > >sometimes 2,3 even 4 copies of the same message come > through. I have > > >confirmed that there is no potential for loops in the > alias file. The > > >users complaining are in the list file only once. I > checked my maillog > > > > >file and for each message that is send via smtp, their > e-mail shows up > > >only once. I am at a total loss! I have read that smtp servers > >sometimes > > >have timeout issues and this causes duplicate messages but > I would not > > >expect this to be the cause since it happens to the same > users all the > > >time. Does anyone out there have any ideas? > > > > > > > >Have the users save their duplicate messages, then review > the "received" > > > >headers to see how/why they got each copy. > From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Dec 3 06:51:27 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from irga15.truemail.co.th (irga15.truemail.co.th [203.144.173.215]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDCEB32C30E for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2005 06:50:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from gb.jb.173.225.revip.asianet.co.th (HELO chudabut) ([61.91.173.225]) by irga15.truemail.co.th with SMTP; 03 Dec 2005 21:50:04 +0700 X-BrightmailFiltered: true X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-IronPort-AV: i="3.99,208,1131296400"; d="scan'208"; a="26111685:sNHT14565440" Message-ID: <017d01c5f818$d4630590$6402a8c0@chudabut> From: "EasyHorpak.com" To: References: <045a01c5ee96$edc78c30$6402a8c0@chudabut> <4382CAC9.9030802@sonny.org> Subject: Majordomo Archive Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 21:49:57 +0700 Organization: Chudabut Group MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="ISO-8859-1"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Archive-Number: 200512/7 X-Sequence-Number: 5238 is it possible for Majordomo Archive in my mailing list? Where can i find it? From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Sat Dec 3 07:25:45 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from irgb7.truemail.co.th (irgb7.truemail.co.th [203.144.173.223]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A0EA32C446 for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2005 07:25:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from gb.jb.173.225.revip.asianet.co.th (HELO chudabut) ([61.91.173.225]) by irgb7.truemail.co.th with SMTP; 03 Dec 2005 22:25:24 +0700 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AI8CAPdEkUM X-IronPort-AV: i="3.99,208,1131296400"; d="scan'208"; a="22108959:sNHT21526414" Message-ID: <01f901c5f81d$c3d40800$6402a8c0@chudabut> From: "EasyHorpak.com" To: Subject: Where can I announce my Mailing list? Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 22:25:14 +0700 Organization: Chudabut Group MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="ISO-8859-1"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Archive-Number: 200512/8 X-Sequence-Number: 5239 Where can I announce my Mailing list? Please....... From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Dec 5 10:40:02 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from ns.nrns.ca (ns.nrns.ca [216.191.212.230]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 067B732C4CC for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2005 10:40:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ns.nrns.ca (_) with ESMTP id 9FC18257CF for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2005 13:39:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from feline.nrns.ca (feline.nrns.ca [10.111.111.68]) by ns.nrns.ca (_) with ESMTP id 6FB3625796 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2005 13:39:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from nrns.ca (host76.nrns.ca [10.111.111.76]) by feline.nrns.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF1283F41C1 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2005 13:39:56 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <43948A48.4020004@nrns.ca> Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 13:43:20 -0500 From: "Allan P. Magmanlac" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Subject: prevent spammers to use owner list address Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at nrns.ca X-Archive-Number: 200512/9 X-Sequence-Number: 5240 hello, I have a closed list but somehow the spammers are using the owner of the list address which gets to the list owner. Sample setup of a list. So in this setup, the spammer insstead of using testonly@testdomain.com he's using testonly-owner@testdomain.com. How can I configure majordomo, so that he cannot send message to the owner directly. testonly: "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper resend -a /usr/local/mail/lists/testonly.pa sswd -l testonly -h my.testdomain.com -r testonly -f testonly-owner testonly-outgoing" owner-testonly: testonly-owner testonly-request: "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper request-answer testonly" testonly-outgoing: :include:/usr/local/mail/lists/testonly owner-testonly-request: testonly-owner testonly-owner: testowner@testdomain.com testonly-approval: testowner@testdomain.com Thanks. From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Tue Dec 6 04:27:09 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from mailgw2.mh.bbc.co.uk (mailgw2.mh.bbc.co.uk [132.185.144.142]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E7B832C7C8 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2005 04:01:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from bbcxue203.national.core.bbc.co.uk (bbcxue203.national.core.bbc.co.uk [10.141.190.21]) by mailgw2.mh.bbc.co.uk (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id jB6C5wBl008997 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2005 12:05:58 GMT X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6603.0 Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Grouping by thread Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 12:06:29 -0000 Message-ID: <61C5AD0F9118F7418723396A644B7467F77527@bbcxue203.national.core.bbc.co.uk> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Grouping by thread Thread-Index: AcX6XX21yNyfJPxIS8W0JfsePOeAcQ== From: "William Kremer" To: X-Archive-Number: 200512/10 X-Sequence-Number: 5241 Hi there, I'm new to the group so pleased to meet you.=20 I moderate a popular discussion list. Because this is a job which I inherited from my predecessor in this company, I did not configure the list and I confess I have very little understanding of majordomo in general. However, the more I explore Majordomo, the more I am coming to see my working practices as archaic. I was wondering whether you good people could make some suggestions about ways to save time, and improve the service for our audience.=20 At the moment I am using majordomo to send out ten discussion group emails on ten different topics, 3 times a week. These emails are compiled from emails which our audience has sent to us... Sorted into threads, you might say. I literally have to cut and paste each of their emails into these different emails, before I send them out. I think too many emails are sent by the group for them not to be grouped together in some way (i.e. to run a 'regular' undigested group). Is there any way to automatically group emails by thread, ready to be moderated before sending them out to the group? This would save me about ten hours a week, and also probably stop me from developing RSI! But if the only 'grouping' tool is the digest one, then maybe the answer is to set up a number of themed groups, and run weekly digests on all of them.=20 Many thanks http://www.bbc.co.uk/ This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system.=20 Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received.=20 Further communication will signify your consent to this. From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Tue Dec 6 10:19:31 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from S3.cableone.net (s3.cableone.net [24.116.0.229]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD3AE32C3A4 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2005 10:19:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.78] (unverified [69.92.133.208]) by S3.cableone.net (CableOne SMTP Service S3) with ESMTP id 39202256 for multiple; Tue, 06 Dec 2005 11:36:37 -0700 Message-ID: <4395D626.9010901@sonny.org> Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 12:19:18 -0600 From: Daniel Liston User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; SunOS i86pc; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20041221 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: prevent spammers to use owner list address References: <43948A48.4020004@nrns.ca> In-Reply-To: <43948A48.4020004@nrns.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-NotAscii: charset=us-ascii; X-IP-stats: Incoming Last 5, First 13, in=2, out=0, spam=0 X-External-IP: 69.92.133.208 X-Abuse-Info: Send abuse complaints to abuse@cableone.net X-Archive-Number: 200512/11 X-Sequence-Number: 5242 The simple answer is to make your testonly-owner alias another list, which has it's own config file allowing only members of the testonly list to post messages to. testonly-owner: "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper resend -l testonly-owner testonly-owner-outgoing" testonly-owner-outgoing: :include:/usr/local/mail/lists/testonly-owner In your /lists/testonly-owner file, have only the owner's email address like any other single user list. In your /lists/testonly-owner.config file, use restrict_post; restrict_post = testonly testonly-post testonly-owner Now, anyone that already belongs to the testonly list can post to the owner, anyone that can post to the testonly list can post to the owner, and the owner is even allowed to post to theirself. Protect your testonly-owner address one step further by disallowing the address to be referenced via an SMTP connection to your server. If you are using a recent sendmail, add this to your /etc/mail/virtusertable; testonly-owner-outgoing@testdomain.com error:nouser User unknown Dan Liston Allan P. Magmanlac wrote: > hello, > I have a closed list but somehow the spammers are using the owner of > the list address which gets to the list owner. Sample setup of a list. > So in this setup, the spammer insstead of using testonly@testdomain.com > he's using testonly-owner@testdomain.com. How can I configure majordomo, > so that he cannot send message to the owner directly. > > > > testonly: "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper resend -a > /usr/local/mail/lists/testonly.pa > sswd -l testonly -h my.testdomain.com -r testonly -f testonly-owner > testonly-outgoing" > owner-testonly: testonly-owner > testonly-request: "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper request-answer testonly" > testonly-outgoing: :include:/usr/local/mail/lists/testonly > owner-testonly-request: testonly-owner > testonly-owner: testowner@testdomain.com > testonly-approval: testowner@testdomain.com > > Thanks. > > From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Dec 7 15:13:43 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from S1.cableone.net (s1.cableone.net [24.116.0.227]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF59432C3C4 for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2005 15:13:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.78] (unverified [69.92.133.208]) by S1.cableone.net (CableOne SMTP Service S1) with ESMTP id 39462891 for multiple; Wed, 07 Dec 2005 16:14:03 -0700 Message-ID: <43976C9F.6030709@sonny.org> Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2005 17:13:35 -0600 From: Daniel Liston User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; SunOS i86pc; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20041221 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: prevent spammers to use owner list address References: <43948A48.4020004@nrns.ca> <4395D626.9010901@sonny.org> <200512071924.jB7JOcUA000371@grover.chaseplanet.us> In-Reply-To: <200512071924.jB7JOcUA000371@grover.chaseplanet.us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-NotAscii: charset=us-ascii; X-IP-stats: Incoming Last 6, First 16, in=2, out=0, spam=0 X-External-IP: 69.92.133.208 X-Abuse-Info: Send abuse complaints to abuse@cableone.net X-Archive-Number: 200512/12 X-Sequence-Number: 5243 No, you still need an entire testonly-owner.config file. Using a default config file that gets created by majordomo does not cause any message or header content to change on it's way to a recipient list. The only settings you would change are the admin password, which every list owner should change as soon as their list is created, and the restrict_post setting discussed in our previous exchange of messages. Remember, the point was to prevent spammers from using the address of the list owner, while still allowing list members to talk to the owner as necessary. If the spammer joins your list, the whole game plan changes. ;) Dan Liston David J. Chase wrote: > In this scheme, could one have nothing _but_ restrict_post in > testonly-owner.config? My concern is to not have any additional > changes occur to messages after those intended (and imposed by > testonly.config). > > Dan Liston wrote (Tue, 06 Dec 2005 12:19:18 -0600): > > The simple answer is to make your testonly-owner alias another list, > which has it's own config file allowing only members of the testonly > list to post messages to. > > testonly-owner: "|/usr/local/majordomo/wrapper resend -l testonly-owner > testonly-owner-outgoing" > testonly-owner-outgoing: :include:/usr/local/mail/lists/testonly-owner > > In your /lists/testonly-owner file, have only the owner's email > address like any other single user list. > > In your /lists/testonly-owner.config file, use restrict_post; > > restrict_post = testonly testonly-post testonly-owner > > Now, anyone that already belongs to the testonly list can post to the > owner, anyone that can post to the testonly list can post to the owner, > and the owner is even allowed to post to theirself. > > ...cut... > > Thanks, > David Chase From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Dec 7 21:38:57 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from mail.digitalrage.org (ns1.digitalrage.org [24.123.67.30]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6357232C15B for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2005 21:38:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost.digitalrage.org [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.digitalrage.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1153528451 for ; Thu, 8 Dec 2005 00:38:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail.digitalrage.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (skywalker.digitalrage.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 36131-03 for ; Thu, 8 Dec 2005 00:38:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.11.38] (linux.digitalrage.org [192.168.11.38]) by mail.digitalrage.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E89A828441 for ; Thu, 8 Dec 2005 00:38:55 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4397C6EF.6070302@digitalrage.org> Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 00:38:55 -0500 From: Elijah Savage Organization: Infrastructure Technology User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (X11/20050715) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Subject: Postfix Majordomo and Virtual mailing list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at digitalrage.org X-Archive-Number: 200512/13 X-Sequence-Number: 5244 All, I am pulling my hair out and this was a last resort I have looked over google and have only found small pieces which has not empowered me to get this setup going. Does anyone know where there might be an how to for getting majordomo and postfix working for virtual domains? I have everything installed and the test list working as it should but it has been a bear and 3 days now trying to get this setup configured appropriately. If anyone would be willing to lend a hand or just point me down the road it would be greatly appreciated. I am using FreeBSD and the latest version of Majordomo. I have tried to use this documentation link http://www.freebsddiary.org/majordomovirtual.php which was created for sendmail but thought it might provide just enough info to get me through but no luck. Any help at all would be greatly appreciated. From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Dec 8 08:07:13 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from avondale.demon.co.uk (avondale.demon.co.uk [83.104.178.231]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0882432C405 for ; Thu, 8 Dec 2005 08:07:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from green.home (IDENT:504@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by avondale.demon.co.uk (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id jB8G79OE025232 for ; Thu, 8 Dec 2005 16:07:09 GMT Received: (from jfh@localhost) by green.home (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id jB8G79CI025231 for majordomo-users@greatcircle.com; Thu, 8 Dec 2005 16:07:09 GMT Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2005 16:07:09 +0000 From: John F Hall To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Grouping by thread Message-ID: <20051208160709.GA23717@avondale.demon.co.uk> Mail-Followup-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com References: <61C5AD0F9118F7418723396A644B7467F77527@bbcxue203.national.core.bbc.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <61C5AD0F9118F7418723396A644B7467F77527@bbcxue203.national.core.bbc.co.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-Archive-Number: 200512/14 X-Sequence-Number: 5245 On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 12:06:29 -0000, William Kremer wrote: > Hi there, I'm new to the group so pleased to meet you. > > I moderate a popular discussion list. Because this is a job which I > inherited from my predecessor in this company, I did not configure the > list and I confess I have very little understanding of majordomo in > general. However, the more I explore Majordomo, the more I am coming to > see my working practices as archaic. I was wondering whether you good > people could make some suggestions about ways to save time, and improve > the service for our audience. > > At the moment I am using majordomo to send out ten discussion group > emails on ten different topics, 3 times a week. These emails are > compiled from emails which our audience has sent to us... Sorted into > threads, you might say. I literally have to cut and paste each of their > emails into these different emails, before I send them out. I think too > many emails are sent by the group for them not to be grouped together in > some way (i.e. to run a 'regular' undigested group). > > Is there any way to automatically group emails by thread, ready to be > moderated before sending them out to the group? This would save me about > ten hours a week, and also probably stop me from developing RSI! I see no one has replied (unless you have had a direct email). Threading would be a function of your MUA - the mail reader that you use to read your email - not of majordomo. If you were using Linux or Unix I would recommend "mutt", but if you're using some version of Windows I cannot help. Have you investigated whether the mail reader you use is capable of threading? If however you are using "threading" as meaning just grouping into similar topics why not create a directory/folder/mailbox for each topic, and move each email into the approriate one? Then you can process them separately as you want to. It can only be done automatically if the original writers are distinguishing them. If, for instance, they are sending then to separate request addresses you need to alias those to different destinations, perhaps by using "tagged" addresses. Thus the "jfh-mdu" address I use here is artificial and is aliased to an address of the form "user+filename", where "user" represents my real login name and "filename" the mailfile where all this email is grouped. Again that is Linux specific, but Windows may have something similar. -- John F Hall From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Dec 8 08:10:25 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from huntingcow.cyberthugs.com (mail.cyberthugs.com [70.96.99.241]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1D8F32C2C2 for ; Thu, 8 Dec 2005 08:10:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by huntingcow.cyberthugs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADD3BB381C9; Thu, 8 Dec 2005 16:10:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from huntingcow.cyberthugs.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (huntingcow.cyberthugs.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 05452-02-94; Thu, 8 Dec 2005 11:10:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from huntingcow.cyberthugs.com (huntingcow.cyberthugs.com [127.0.0.1]) by huntingcow.cyberthugs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86552B381D4; Thu, 8 Dec 2005 11:10:23 -0500 (EST) Received: (from ddewey@localhost) by huntingcow.cyberthugs.com (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id jB8GANIP008774; Thu, 8 Dec 2005 11:10:23 -0500 From: Dave Dewey Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2005 11:10:23 -0500 To: Elijah Savage Cc: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Postfix Majordomo and Virtual mailing list Message-ID: <20051208161023.GB3030@huntingcow.cyberthugs.com> References: <4397C6EF.6070302@digitalrage.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4397C6EF.6070302@digitalrage.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at cyberthugs.com X-Archive-Number: 200512/15 X-Sequence-Number: 5246 Quoting Elijah Savage (esavage@digitalrage.org): > All, > > I am pulling my hair out and this was a last resort I have looked over > google and have only found small pieces which has not empowered me to > get this setup going. Does anyone know where there might be an how to > for getting majordomo and postfix working for virtual domains? I have > everything installed and the test list working as it should but it has > been a bear and 3 days now trying to get this setup configured > appropriately. If anyone would be willing to lend a hand or just point > me down the road it would be greatly appreciated. I am using FreeBSD and > the latest version of Majordomo. I have tried to use this documentation > link http://www.freebsddiary.org/majordomovirtual.php which was created > for sendmail but thought it might provide just enough info to get me > through but no luck. I have used Majordomo, Postfix and virtual domains for several years. What problem are you seeing? From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Tue Dec 20 09:47:31 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from web53601.mail.yahoo.com (web53601.mail.yahoo.com [206.190.37.34]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id C648532C153 for ; Tue, 20 Dec 2005 09:47:30 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 68522 invoked by uid 60001); 20 Dec 2005 17:47:29 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=LlFsd2MKoNuElvd0OZiFALByWJbQpyTBommGDDMoDY1lzAJsovToUCcrqpfclJ/V7ZruhxCS8R12QG9wifes3eXrvkjGtvzbhXPGbIL5OD0xGbsyHoVp9JM8ouph3XFPeGu7rzLIO7MqRYKOGZzz5s/sGC5IDhGR8U54+CUwKtw= ; Message-ID: <20051220174729.68520.qmail@web53601.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [129.107.2.142] by web53601.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 20 Dec 2005 09:47:29 PST Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 09:47:29 -0800 (PST) From: Chinmay Jayaswal Subject: A tiny problem tht seems to be huge! To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-395058951-1135100849=:60895" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archive-Number: 200512/16 X-Sequence-Number: 5247 --0-395058951-1135100849=:60895 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hii, Well, the problem tht I have is pretty bizzare! I had a problem in adding a fourth owner to the majordomo.aliases (the fourth owner’s is only to approve the bounced messages). Let me tell you the exact situation. I already had 3 owners in the owner’s lists(like, list-owner: owner1, owner2, owner3), and now I wish to add the fourth owner, and after adding him to the fourth position (like, list-owner: owner1, owner2, owner3, owner4) when the fourth owner tried to forward a bounced mail, his mail was received by the list recipients as normal mail along with the Approved:password line! But when I replaced and added the fourth owner to third position(like, list-owner: owner1, owner2, owner4, owner3) , he could now forward the bounced mails correctly, but now, the fourth owner (owner3) cant forward them correctly! So is it that the number of list-approval is limited only to three?? Can you please help me here! I would really appreciate your help here. Thanks, Chinmay. Regards, Chinmay. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com --0-395058951-1135100849=:60895 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Hii,
          Well, the problem tht I have is pretty bizzare!  I had a problem in adding a fourth owner to the majordomo.aliases (the fourth owner’s is only to approve the bounced messages). Let me tell you the exact situation. I already had 3 owners in the owner’s lists(like, list-owner: owner1, owner2, owner3), and now I wish to add the fourth owner, and after adding him to the fourth position (like, list-owner: owner1, owner2, owner3, owner4)  when the fourth owner tried to forward a bounced mail, his mail was received by the list recipients as  normal mail along with the Approved:password line! But when I replaced and added the fourth owner to third position(like, list-owner: owner1, owner2, owner4, owner3) , he could now forward the bounced mails correctly, but now, the fourth owner (owner3) cant forward them correctly! So is it that the number of list-approval is limited only to three?? Can you please help me here! I would really appreciate your help here.
 
Thanks,
Chinmay.
 



Regards,
      Chinmay.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com --0-395058951-1135100849=:60895-- From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Dec 22 07:54:18 2005 X-Original-To: Majordomo-Users@greatcircle.com Received: from wbmler1.mail.xerox.com (wbmler1.mail.xerox.com [13.13.138.216]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1F9632C2C7 for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2005 07:53:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from wbmlir1.mail.xerox.com (wbmlir1.mail.xerox.com [13.131.8.221]) by wbmler1.mail.xerox.com (8.13.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id jBMFs28a009784 for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2005 10:54:03 -0500 Received: from wbmlir1.mail.xerox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wbmlir1.mail.xerox.com (8.13.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id jBMFrCaT001840 for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2005 10:53:12 -0500 Received: from usa7061gw02.na.xerox.net (usa7061gw02.na.xerox.net [13.151.32.4]) by wbmlir1.mail.xerox.com (8.13.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id jBMFqt0I001641 for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2005 10:53:12 -0500 Received: from usa0300ms02.na.xerox.net ([13.135.34.11]) by usa7061gw02.na.xerox.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Thu, 22 Dec 2005 07:53:01 -0800 x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: Problems with duplicate messages Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 10:52:58 -0500 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Problems with duplicate messages Thread-Index: AcX3Y+s2P+q13RoyTmicqH/FNjPsPQAAMH2AA+qpsSA= From: "Doty, Robert" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Dec 2005 15:53:01.0874 (UTC) FILETIME=[C9D54920:01C6070F] X-Archive-Number: 200512/17 X-Sequence-Number: 5248 =20 This is just a follow-up to let everyone know that I have resolved the problem. What was happening is that there were a few users on the DL that were causing mail faults (over quota, access denied, etc...). After removing these users from the DL, the duplicate message problems went away. Thanks to everyone for your ideas! Happy Holidays, Rob Owner of the WantAds@rochester.rr.com FREE online classifieds service http://www.psasm.com / http://home.rochester.rr.com/rdoty/WantAds.html =09 =20 -----Original Message----- From: majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com [mailto:majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com] On Behalf Of Peter P. Benac Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 12:24 PM To: 'Frank Bax'; Majordomo-Users@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Problems with duplicate messages To be add to this I had a similar issue last week on the lists that I host. It turned out to be an issue with Yahoo. This included sbcglobal.net.=20=20 Moral of the story here you need to check the Exchange Logs to see if the message came in as a duplicate. When I checked my sendmail logs I noticed that Yahoo was sending the same message two times, mere seconds apart. The issue as corrected itself, but it was frustrating. ---- Peter P. Benac, CCNA Emacolet Networking Services, Inc Providing Network and Systems Project Management and Installation and Web Hosting. Phone: 919-618-2557 Web: http://www.emacolet.com Need quick reliable Systems or Network Management advice visit http://www.nmsusers.org To have principles... First have courage.. With principles comes integrity!!! =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com=20 > [mailto:majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com] On Behalf Of Frank Bax > Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 09:14 > To: Majordomo-Users@greatcircle.com > Subject: Re: Problems with duplicate messages >=20 > Every message is *exactly* the same, not even one byte=20 > different? I've=20 > never seen that before. Are all messages in user's inbox - or other=20 > folders? Does user have any filters that say *copy* message=20 > - which would=20 > *create* duplicates. I *think* if server sends more than once there=20 > *should* be a record of it, but I've never even *seen* an=20 > Exchange server,=20 > never mind know anything about what it might do. >=20 > Here's what I would do next... Send another message that you=20 > think will be=20 > duplicated, check the users mailbox on server *before* they=20 > download the=20 > message to their own machine. Then have user check for=20 > messages and see=20 > *when* message is duplicated. >=20 >=20 >=20 > At 08:43 AM 12/2/05, Doty, Robert wrote: >=20 > >Headers are identical on the duplicate messages. Does this=20 > indicate a > >mail server (EXCHANGE) issue? > > > >Thanks, > > > >Rob > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com > >[mailto:majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com] On Behalf Of Frank Bax > >Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2005 10:01 PM > >To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com > >Subject: Re: Problems with duplicate messages > > > >At 07:03 AM 11/30/05, Doty, Robert wrote: > > > > >I am using Majordomo 1.94, and have a single list file and > > >configuration. I have 1200 users subscribed to the list. I > >periodically > > >sort the list by domain name to speed up mail delivery.=20=20 > The problem I > >am > > >having is that some users complain of duplicate copies of=20 > each message, > > > > >sometimes 2,3 even 4 copies of the same message come=20 > through. I have > > >confirmed that there is no potential for loops in the=20 > alias file. The > > >users complaining are in the list file only once. I=20 > checked my maillog > > > > >file and for each message that is send via smtp, their=20 > e-mail shows up > > >only once. I am at a total loss! I have read that smtp servers > >sometimes > > >have timeout issues and this causes duplicate messages but=20 > I would not > > >expect this to be the cause since it happens to the same=20 > users all the > > >time. Does anyone out there have any ideas? > > > > > > > >Have the users save their duplicate messages, then review=20 > the "received" > > > >headers to see how/why they got each copy. >=20 From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Tue Dec 27 08:04:07 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from bandsman.co.uk (nigelhorne.force9.co.uk [212.159.106.41]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8C2132C1C3 for ; Tue, 27 Dec 2005 08:04:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.7] ([192.168.1.7]) (authenticated bits=0) by bandsman.co.uk (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id jBRG46vY017410 for ; Tue, 27 Dec 2005 16:04:06 GMT Subject: Build warnings (minor issue) From: Nigel Horne To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Organization: NJH Music Message-Id: <1135699466.20506.6.camel@mac.bandsman.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 (1.4.6-2.ydl.1) Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 16:04:26 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received-SPF: pass (bandsman.co.uk: 192.168.1.7 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism) X-Archive-Number: 200512/18 X-Sequence-Number: 5249 When running 'make wrapper' these warnings appear. Nothing is important but they should be tidied, this is with Linux FC4/x86 (incidentally, I notice that my CFLAGS are ignored). cc -DBIN=\"/usr/majordomo/majordomo-1.94.5\" -DPATH=\"PATH=/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/local/bin\" -DHOME=\"HOME=/usr/majordomo/majordomo-1.94.5\" -DSHELL=\"SHELL=/bin/sh\" -DMAJORDOMO_CF=\"MAJORDOMO_CF=/usr/majordomo/majordomo-1.94.5/majordomo.cf\" -DPOSIX_UID=504 -DPOSIX_GID=504 -o wrapper wrapper.c wrapper.c: In function ‘main’: wrapper.c:71: warning: incompatible implicit declaration of built-in function ‘exit’ wrapper.c:78: warning: incompatible implicit declaration of built-in function ‘exit’ wrapper.c:81: warning: incompatible implicit declaration of built-in function ‘malloc’ wrapper.c:83: warning: incompatible implicit declaration of built-in function ‘exit’ wrapper.c:143: warning: incompatible implicit declaration of built-in function ‘exit’ wrapper.c:156: warning: incompatible implicit declaration of built-in function ‘exit’ -- Nigel Horne. Arranger, Adjudicator, Band Trainer, Composer, Typesetter. NJH Music, Barnsley, UK. ICQ#20252325 njh@bandsman.co.uk http://www.bandsman.co.uk From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Dec 29 12:40:11 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from exch01ny.nyc.amlaw.corp (208-3-165-99.gkw.amlaw.com [208.3.165.99]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFF8532C1F9 for ; Thu, 29 Dec 2005 12:40:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from 10.1.11.22 ([10.1.11.22]) by exch01ny.nyc.amlaw.corp ([10.1.50.5]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Thu, 29 Dec 2005 20:40:10 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.2.1.051004 Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 15:40:08 -0500 Subject: hardware specs From: Tahir Chaudry To: Message-ID: Thread-Topic: hardware specs Thread-Index: AcYMuA5LTRpbJnirEdqs2QAKlefRWg== Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="B_3218715609_343725884" X-Archive-Number: 200512/19 X-Sequence-Number: 5250 > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --B_3218715609_343725884 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit I need to setup a majordomo server for around 1 Million emails per user list. we must use sun server. any idea what type of server would do the job? I was thinking V210 2x1.2GHz CPU plus 4 GB RAM. -- tahir --B_3218715609_343725884 Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable hardware specs I= need to setup a majordomo server for around 1 Million emails per user list= .

we must use sun server.  any idea what type of server would do the job= ?

I was thinking V210 2x1.2GHz CPU plus 4 GB RAM.

-- tahir

--B_3218715609_343725884-- From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Dec 29 14:16:12 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from mail.sonny.com (unknown [70.58.223.141]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18DDD32C212 for ; Thu, 29 Dec 2005 14:16:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from sonny.org (father.sonny.com [192.168.1.78]) by magnia.sonny.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 Patch 1 (built Aug 19 2002)) with ESMTP id <0ISA00C4Z5RUVE@magnia.sonny.com> for majordomo-users@greatcircle.com; Thu, 29 Dec 2005 16:14:18 -0600 (CST) Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 16:16:23 -0600 From: Daniel Liston Subject: Re: hardware specs In-reply-to: To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Message-id: <43B46037.7030004@sonny.org> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) References: X-Archive-Number: 200512/20 X-Sequence-Number: 5251 The server you are thinking of might be a bit weak for the size of the mailing list(s) you are considering. On the other hand, if you are running an announcement only (no replies or other interaction by your zubscribers), you might be looking at up to 40 msgs/sec output with a really fast MTA and 7Mbps connection. One outgoing distribution, on a 35k message requires 1.4Mbps of bandwidth to support 40 msg/sec. One of these lists distributing a 35k message would eat a full T1 pipe for over 7 hours. If you have varied bandwidth between sending and receiving data, it is your send pipe that can fill up. This calculation assumes a separate message for each and every recipient totalling 35Gb of data to move across the pipe. How long does it take you to copy 35Gb of data from one computer to another on your local (100Mbps?) network? Now factor in the speed of your internet connection. Dan Liston Tahir Chaudry wrote: > I need to setup a majordomo server for around 1 Million emails per user > list. > > we must use sun server. any idea what type of server would do the job? > > I was thinking V210 2x1.2GHz CPU plus 4 GB RAM. > > -- tahir > From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Dec 29 18:21:02 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from wvmler1.mail.xerox.com (wvmler1.mail.xerox.com [13.8.138.216]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B2EB32C38E for ; Thu, 29 Dec 2005 18:21:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from wvmlir1.mail.xerox.com (wvmlir1.mail.xerox.com [13.147.8.221]) by wvmler1.mail.xerox.com (8.13.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id jBU2L0cW029626 for ; Thu, 29 Dec 2005 18:21:01 -0800 Received: from wvmlir1.mail.xerox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wvmlir1.mail.xerox.com (8.13.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id jBU2KJcf031121 for ; Thu, 29 Dec 2005 18:20:19 -0800 Received: from usa0300gw02.na.xerox.net (usa0300gw02.na.xerox.net [13.129.0.42]) by wvmlir1.mail.xerox.com (8.13.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id jBU2KHw2031116 for ; Thu, 29 Dec 2005 18:20:19 -0800 Received: from usa0300ms02.na.xerox.net ([13.135.34.11]) by usa0300gw02.na.xerox.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Thu, 29 Dec 2005 21:20:16 -0500 x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Bulk_Mailer questions Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 21:20:16 -0500 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Bulk_Mailer questions Thread-Index: AcX1pgkzTjMR12OZScKXBD1TTwRRuAXQL9yg From: "Doty, Robert" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Dec 2005 02:20:16.0899 (UTC) FILETIME=[92F29D30:01C60CE7] X-Archive-Number: 200512/21 X-Sequence-Number: 5252 I am trying to use bulk_mailer with majordomo, but I am running into a problem or two... 1) using standard sendmail, if I have MS Exchange users on the mailing list that have "out of office" enabled, the out of office messages are not returned to the sender. When I use bulk_mailer+sendmail, these "out of office" messages are returned to the sender. This is very annoying. Is there a way to get bulk_mailer+sendmail to behave the same way as standard sendmail? 2) when using bulk_mailer, I did not notice a difference in the delivery method or speed. It still looked like it was delivering everying in a serial fashion, not parallel. Any hints? Thanks, Rob =20 =20 G. Robert Doty MCD Integration Manager XOG / SEBU / MCD Xerox Corporation Phone: 585-425-6562 Fax: 585-425-6110 Robert.Doty@xerox.com "This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient(s) please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. Finally, the recipient should check that this email is authentic and examine it for the presence of viruses. Xerox does perform virus checks but cannot accept liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. Thank you." From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Dec 29 21:24:56 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from mail.sonny.com (unknown [70.58.223.141]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1119B32C38A for ; Thu, 29 Dec 2005 21:24:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from sonny.org (father.sonny.com [192.168.1.78]) by magnia.sonny.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 Patch 1 (built Aug 19 2002)) with ESMTP id <0ISA00D5WPM7PG@magnia.sonny.com> for majordomo-users@greatcircle.com; Thu, 29 Dec 2005 23:22:55 -0600 (CST) Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 23:25:07 -0600 From: Daniel Liston Subject: Re: hardware specs In-reply-to: <9E00CCC86D88794D90F01E668F7DAA6694BD63@exch01ny.nyc.amlaw.corp> To: Majordomo Users Message-id: <43B4C4B3.5090300@sonny.org> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) References: <43B46037.7030004@sonny.org> <9E00CCC86D88794D90F01E668F7DAA6694BD63@exch01ny.nyc.amlaw.corp> X-Archive-Number: 200512/22 X-Sequence-Number: 5253 Your mileage may vary, but in terms of space, power, performance, price, and heat, you may find the T1000 to be a better deal for about the same price as the v210. In my opinion, they are both noisy, but most people do not keep either one under their desk. I have dequeued 375,000 messages from a Sun MTA on a sf440 class server across a gigabit network to a Sun mailstore with the new Niagra (CMT) processor and beta storage arrays in 30 minutes. I doubt you will ever see this kind of performance when you have forces outside your control acting against you, like destination MX hosts off-line, DNS corruption, maximum recipient restrictions with all the major online providers, etc. To really answer your question, is the v210 big enough? That is dependent on how many messages you need to send to your million users each day, or how many lists with a million subscribers you have. I like to err on the cautious side, but you need to do the math. How many messages of what size to how many distribution lists with how many zubscribers per day/week/month whatever? You might be able to get more than 40 msg/sec off the system, but even if you got 10 recipients per/msg successfully delivered, 100,000 / 40 is still 2,500 seconds, or about 42 minutes that has to be dedicated to each distribution. Even getting 10 rcpt/msg is a bit optimistic. Worst case scenario, going with a single rcpt/msg, you are looking at 42 minutes stretching to 7 hours. All these figures do not take into account the CPU or disk I/O that would be required to queue the mail until delivered. The way majordomo works, is one message to all one million recipients. Very little disk space, but also makes delivery a serial process. To optimize delivery, you create more messages with less addresses per message to be delivered. This eats more CPU and more disk just to prepare for delivery. Sorry I could not give you an exact answer, Dan Liston Tahir Chaudry wrote: > Dear Dan, thank you very much for your response. We are only sending > out the mail, it is more of announcements only email. > > Thank you for a great insight about the bandwidth. Do you believe > we need a bigger server if the bandwidth is under control? > > Thank you again, > > Tahir > > > -----Daniel Liston said----- > > The server you are thinking of might be a bit weak for the size > of the mailing list(s) you are considering. On the other hand, > if you are running an announcement only (no replies or other > interaction by your zubscribers), you might be looking at up to > 40 msgs/sec output with a really fast MTA and 7Mbps connection. > One outgoing distribution, on a 35k message requires 1.4Mbps of > bandwidth to support 40 msg/sec. > > One of these lists distributing a 35k message would eat a full > T1 pipe for over 7 hours. If you have varied bandwidth between > sending and receiving data, it is your send pipe that can fill > up. This calculation assumes a separate message for each and > every recipient totalling 35Gb of data to move across the pipe. > > How long does it take you to copy 35Gb of data from one computer > to another on your local (100Mbps?) network? Now factor in the > speed of your internet connection. > > Dan Liston > > Tahir Chaudry wrote: > > I need to setup a majordomo server for around 1 Million emails per user > > list. > > > > we must use sun server. any idea what type of server would do the job? > > > > I was thinking V210 2x1.2GHz CPU plus 4 GB RAM. > > > > -- tahir > > > > From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Fri Dec 30 06:10:26 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from exch01ny.nyc.amlaw.corp (208-3-165-99.gkw.amlaw.com [208.3.165.99]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D89032C3B3 for ; Fri, 30 Dec 2005 06:09:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from 10.1.11.22 ([10.1.11.22]) by exch01ny.nyc.amlaw.corp ([10.1.50.5]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Fri, 30 Dec 2005 14:23:34 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.2.1.051004 Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2005 09:23:32 -0500 Subject: Re: hardware specs From: Tahir Chaudry To: Daniel Liston , Majordomo Users Message-ID: Thread-Topic: hardware specs Thread-Index: AcYNTJxx2y9gDHk/Edqs2QAKlefRWg== In-Reply-To: <43B4C4B3.5090300@sonny.org> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="B_3218779413_347561087" X-Archive-Number: 200512/23 X-Sequence-Number: 5254 > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --B_3218779413_347561087 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable again, thank you so much for such a great and detailed answer. you=B9ve helped a lot, and because of you, I have all my answers. thank you again. : ) tahir On 12/30/05 12:25 AM, "Daniel Liston" wrote: > Your mileage may vary, but in terms of space, power, performance, > price, and heat, you may find the T1000 to be a better deal for > about the same price as the v210. In my opinion, they are both > noisy, but most people do not keep either one under their desk. >=20 > I have dequeued 375,000 messages from a Sun MTA on a sf440 class > server across a gigabit network to a Sun mailstore with the new > Niagra (CMT) processor and beta storage arrays in 30 minutes. I > doubt you will ever see this kind of performance when you have > forces outside your control acting against you, like destination > MX hosts off-line, DNS corruption, maximum recipient restrictions > with all the major online providers, etc. >=20 > To really answer your question, is the v210 big enough? That is > dependent on how many messages you need to send to your million > users each day, or how many lists with a million subscribers you > have. I like to err on the cautious side, but you need to do the > math. How many messages of what size to how many distribution > lists with how many zubscribers per day/week/month whatever? >=20 > You might be able to get more than 40 msg/sec off the system, but > even if you got 10 recipients per/msg successfully delivered, > 100,000 / 40 is still 2,500 seconds, or about 42 minutes that has > to be dedicated to each distribution. Even getting 10 rcpt/msg > is a bit optimistic. Worst case scenario, going with a single > rcpt/msg, you are looking at 42 minutes stretching to 7 hours. >=20 > All these figures do not take into account the CPU or disk I/O > that would be required to queue the mail until delivered. The > way majordomo works, is one message to all one million recipients. > Very little disk space, but also makes delivery a serial process. > To optimize delivery, you create more messages with less addresses > per message to be delivered. This eats more CPU and more disk > just to prepare for delivery. >=20 > Sorry I could not give you an exact answer, > Dan Liston >=20 > Tahir Chaudry wrote: >> > Dear Dan, thank you very much for your response. We are only sending >> > out the mail, it is more of announcements only email. >> >=20 >> > Thank you for a great insight about the bandwidth. Do you believe >> > we need a bigger server if the bandwidth is under control? >> >=20 >> > Thank you again, >> >=20 >> > Tahir=20 >> >=20 >> >=20 >> > -----Daniel Liston said----- >> >=20 >> > The server you are thinking of might be a bit weak for the size >> > of the mailing list(s) you are considering. On the other hand, >> > if you are running an announcement only (no replies or other >> > interaction by your zubscribers), you might be looking at up to >> > 40 msgs/sec output with a really fast MTA and 7Mbps connection. >> > One outgoing distribution, on a 35k message requires 1.4Mbps of >> > bandwidth to support 40 msg/sec. >> >=20 >> > One of these lists distributing a 35k message would eat a full >> > T1 pipe for over 7 hours. If you have varied bandwidth between >> > sending and receiving data, it is your send pipe that can fill >> > up. This calculation assumes a separate message for each and >> > every recipient totalling 35Gb of data to move across the pipe. >> >=20 >> > How long does it take you to copy 35Gb of data from one computer >> > to another on your local (100Mbps?) network? Now factor in the >> > speed of your internet connection. >> >=20 >> > Dan Liston >> >=20 >> > Tahir Chaudry wrote: >>> > > I need to setup a majordomo server for around 1 Million emails per= user >>> > > list. >>> > > >>> > > we must use sun server. any idea what type of server would do the= job? >>> > > >>> > > I was thinking V210 2x1.2GHz CPU plus 4 GB RAM. >>> > > >>> > > -- tahir >>> > > >> >=20 >> >=20 >=20 -- tahir=20 --B_3218779413_347561087 Content-type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Re: hardware specs a= gain, thank you so much for such a great and detailed answer.

you’ve helped a lot, and because of you, I have all my answers.

thank you again.   : )

tahir


On 12/30/05 12:25 AM, "Daniel Liston" <dliston@sonny.org> w= rote:

Your mileage may vary, but in terms of space, power, per= formance,
price, and heat, you may find the T1000 to be a better deal for
about the same price as the v210.  In my opinion, they are both
noisy, but most people do not keep either one under their desk.

I have dequeued 375,000 messages from a Sun MTA on a sf440 class
server across a gigabit network to a Sun mailstore with the new
Niagra (CMT) processor and beta storage arrays in 30 minutes.  I
doubt you will ever see this kind of performance when you have
forces outside your control acting against you, like destination
MX hosts off-line, DNS corruption, maximum recipient restrictions
with all the major online providers, etc.

To really answer your question, is the v210 big enough?  That is
dependent on how many messages you need to send to your million
users each day, or how many lists with a million subscribers you
have.  I like to err on the cautious side, but you need to do the
math.  How many messages of what size to how many distribution
lists with how many zubscribers per day/week/month whatever?

You might be able to get more than 40 msg/sec off the system, but
even if you got 10 recipients per/msg successfully delivered,
100,000 / 40 is still 2,500 seconds, or about 42 minutes that has
to be dedicated to each distribution.  Even getting 10 rcpt/msg
is a bit optimistic.  Worst case scenario, going with a single
rcpt/msg, you are looking at 42 minutes stretching to 7 hours.

All these figures do not take into account the CPU or disk I/O
that would be required to queue the mail until delivered.  The
way majordomo works, is one message to all one million recipients.
Very little disk space, but also makes delivery a serial process.
To optimize delivery, you create more messages with less addresses
per message to be delivered.  This eats more CPU and more disk
just to prepare for delivery.

Sorry I could not give you an exact answer,
Dan Liston

Tahir Chaudry wrote:
> Dear Dan, thank you very much for your response.  We are only sen= ding
> out the mail, it is more of announcements only email.
>
> Thank you for a great insight about the bandwidth.  Do you believ= e
> we need a bigger server if the bandwidth is under control?
>
> Thank you again,
>
> Tahir
>
>
> -----Daniel Liston said-----
>
> The server you are thinking of might be a bit weak for the size
> of the mailing list(s) you are considering.  On the other hand, > if you are running an announcement only (no replies or other
> interaction by your zubscribers), you might be looking at up to
> 40 msgs/sec output with a really fast MTA and 7Mbps connection.
> One outgoing distribution, on a 35k message requires 1.4Mbps of
> bandwidth to support 40 msg/sec.
>
> One of these lists distributing a 35k message would eat a full
> T1 pipe for over 7 hours.  If you have varied bandwidth between > sending and receiving data, it is your send pipe that can fill
> up.  This calculation assumes a separate message for each and
> every recipient totalling 35Gb of data to move across the pipe.
>
> How long does it take you to copy 35Gb of data from one computer
> to another on your local (100Mbps?) network?  Now factor in the > speed of your internet connection.
>
> Dan Liston
>
> Tahir Chaudry wrote:
>  > I need to setup a majordomo server for around 1 Million ema= ils per user
>  > list.
>  >
>  > we must use sun server.  any idea what type of server = would do the job?
>  >
>  > I was thinking V210 2x1.2GHz CPU plus 4 GB RAM.
>  >
>  > -- tahir
>  >
>
>




-- tahir

--B_3218779413_347561087-- From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Fri Dec 30 07:37:55 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com Received: from hermes.jjbedmonton.com (unknown [209.148.223.55]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B522132C178 for ; Fri, 30 Dec 2005 07:37:37 -0800 (PST) Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C60D56.F56938AD" Subject: Integration X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2005 08:35:21 -0700 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Integration Thread-Index: AcYNAWrXnHM5uPKDSdK9Ilrl9GeKVgAVTp/p References: <43B46037.7030004@sonny.org> <9E00CCC86D88794D90F01E668F7DAA6694BD63@exch01ny.nyc.amlaw.corp> <43B4C4B3.5090300@sonny.org> From: "Daniel Kaliel" To: "Majordomo Users" X-Archive-Number: 200512/24 X-Sequence-Number: 5255 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C60D56.F56938AD Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable We just moved to an Exchange server to utilize the benefits of a Blackberry= Enterprise Server. Does anyone know if there is a way to integrate Exchan= ge and Majordomo? I looked at some other software out there and it seems u= nless you want to drop a lot of money nothing comes even remotely close to = Majordomo. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C60D56.F56938AD Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: hardware specs
We just moved to an Exchange server to utiliz= e the=20 benefits of a Blackberry Enterprise Server.  Does anyone know if there= is a=20 way to integrate Exchange and Majordomo?  I looked at some other softw= are=20 out there and it seems unless you want to drop a lot of money nothing comes= even=20 remotely close to Majordomo.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C60D56.F56938AD-- From majordomo-users-owner@greatcircle.com Fri Dec 30 08:50:08 2005 X-Original-To: majordomo-users@GreatCircle.COM Received: from wrenkasky.com (esson.net [216.102.129.43]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DDD932C2A0 for ; Fri, 30 Dec 2005 08:50:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from EDS.esson.net (eds.wrenkasky.com [10.10.10.11]) (authenticated bits=0) by wrenkasky.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id jBUGnx0m025505 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 30 Dec 2005 08:50:04 -0800 Message-Id: <6.0.0.22.2.20051230084613.01beecc0@mail.esson.net> X-Sender: ed@mail.esson.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.0.0.22 Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2005 08:50:00 -0800 To: "Daniel Kaliel" From: Ed Kasky Subject: Re: Integration Cc: majordomo-users@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: References: <43B46037.7030004@sonny.org> <9E00CCC86D88794D90F01E668F7DAA6694BD63@exch01ny.nyc.amlaw.corp> <43B4C4B3.5090300@sonny.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Received-SPF: pass (wrenkasky.com: 10.10.10.11 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.87.1/1219/Wed Dec 28 14:57:59 2005 on yoda2.wrenkasky.com X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Archive-Number: 200512/25 X-Sequence-Number: 5256 At 07:35 AM Friday, 12/30/2005, you wrote -=> >We just moved to an Exchange server to utilize the benefits of a >Blackberry Enterprise Server. Does anyone know if there is a way to >integrate Exchange and Majordomo? I looked at some other software out >there and it seems unless you want to drop a lot of money nothing comes >even remotely close to Majordomo. Does anyone know of a list manager that runs on Windows? Considering the cost, I would run a small linux box for the MD implementation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Randomly Generated Quote (500 of 1024): Have a nice diurnal anomaly.