Great Circle Associates Majordomo-Users
(February 2001)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: using "bulk"
From: Chip Old <fold @ bcpl . net>
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 22:54:32 -0500 (EST)
To: Majordomo-Users <majordomo-users @ GreatCircle . COM>
In-reply-to: <200102051443590290.0686A0F1@smtp-server>

On Mon, 5 Feb 2001, Sharon F. wrote to majordomo-users@GreatCircle.COM:

> Since so many mailing list programs are blocking headers with "bulk"
> in them I wandered if there was a better way to send mailing lists.  
> I've read the FAQ and such and am still unclear as to the benefits of
> using, or not using, the following:
> 
> # precedence           [word] (bulk) <resend,digest>
> 	# Put a precedence header with value <value> into the outgoing
> 	# message.
> precedence          =   bulk
> 
> What are the other options and what kinds of trouble do I leave myself
> open to if I use them?

It isn't mailing list programs (Majordomo, Procmail, listserv, etc) that
are blocking messages with "Precedence: bulk" in the headers.  The
blocking is being done by Mail Transport Agents (Sendmail, etc) at sites
where employees are not allowed to pqarticipate in mailing lists, and at
sites where anti-spam filters incorrectly assume that "bulk" means spam.

The "Precedence:" header is used by the Mail Transport Agent to rank
messages by importance when it is processing the mail queue.  A standard
sendmail.cf recognizes the following Precedence settings:

 first-class=0
 special-delivery=100
 list=-30
 bulk=-60
 junk=-100

The numeric values tell Sendmail how each is ranked, from first-class
(normal messages) at 0 through junk mail at -100.  Special-delivery
(+100) is rarely used.  It's possible to create other Precedence labels
and use them in your headers, but other MTAs won't understand them.

Mailing list messages are usually sent with Precedence set to bulk.  If
you're having trouble with list messages being rejected by misconfigured
spam filters, try setting the precedence to list.  That may or may not
help, depending on what the filters are using to decide what is spam and
what is not.

I don't think using Precedence: list will cause any problems.  Your MTA
will rank list messages as more important than usual in the queue, which
may or may not slow down processing of normal first-class mail in the
queue, but that shouldn't be a problem unless your mail server is
extremely busy or extremely underpowered.  Don't go to the extreme of
using Precedence: first-class.  Most well-mannered autoresponders will
ignore bulk and list messages, but will respond to first-class messages.  
That can cause you some nasty autoresponse loop problems.

-- 
Chip Old (Francis E. Old)               E-Mail:  fold@bcpl.net
Manager, BCPL Network Services          Voice:   410-887-6180
Manager, BCPL.NET Internet Services     FAX:     410-887-2091
Baltimore County Public Library         ICBM:    39.39910 N
320 York Road                                    76.60300 W
Towson, Maryland 21204 U.S.A.






References:
Indexed By Date Previous: Re: spam filters, and again with the _SUBJECTS_
From: Doug Brewer <doug@alphoto.com>
Next: majordomo 1.94.x with perl 5.6.x?
From: Jeff Wasilko <jeffw@smoe.org>
Indexed By Thread Previous: using "bulk"
From: "Sharon F." <amazon@one.net>
Next: Re: SPAMMING
From: Curtis Maurand <curtis@lamere.net>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com