From owner-list-managers-outgoing Thu May 1 16:24:48 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id QAA02466 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 1 May 1997 16:15:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from colossus.arl.mil (colossus.arl.mil [131.218.204.98]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id QAA02301 for ; Thu, 1 May 1997 16:14:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [131.218.204.98] by colossus.arl.mil with ESMTP (Eudora Internet Mail Server 1.1.2); Thu, 1 May 1997 19:20:42 -0400 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Organization: Little to None X-Mailer: Eudora 3.0 for Cray Y-MP Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 19:20:05 -0400 To: listmom-talk@skyweyr.com, List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Vince Sabio Subject: Need Sendmail Assistance Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi folks, I have some poor sysadmin in India who has sendmail set up to bounce messages back to the "From:" address -- not the "Sender" or "Errors-To" address, if one is present. We listmoms all know what that means: Potential mail loops. Anyway, I dropped my usual, nicely worded, you-and-all-your-offspring- must-die-for-this-mistake(tm) message to the postmaster, who responded rather quickly. (Amazing, how seriously they take the offspring thing over there.) Turns out, he is clueless(tm), but would like some assistance, since it seems that I'm not the first one to threaten his offspring. However, Idunno *squat* about sendmail.cf, so I really cannot help him. That's where *you* (yes, YOU) come in. If you're a sendmail hound with lots of patience *and* the ability to read RFC822 mail typed with a modest Indian accent, please respond to me directly so I can put you in touch with him. He really seems interested in atoning for his sins -- or at least fixing his mistake. Please RSVP to wavelet@colossus.arl.mil (preferably CC me at my listmom account, in case I'm at home: listmom@telephonet.com), since it is quasi- off-topic for these lists -- albeit a rather *important* off-topic issue for us list owners. - Vince Sabio orionsoft@telephonet.com -- If you run a mailing list and are tired of manually processing mail bounces, then you probably need SmartBounce -- currently managing mailing lists in excess of 150,000 subscribers. For more information, send a blank email to or visit . -- From owner-list-managers-outgoing Thu May 1 22:54:25 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id WAA02224 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 1 May 1997 22:43:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nmia.com (socrates.nmia.com [198.59.166.170]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id WAA02217 for ; Thu, 1 May 1997 22:43:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from plato.nmia.com by nmia.com with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.29.1 #3) id m0wNB9C-001JlFC; Thu, 1 May 97 23:44 MDT Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 23:44:46 -0600 (MDT) From: Ozz Graham To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: New here Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I'm fairly new to mailing lsits. I run 2 small lists, and have had a MAJOR problem with servers who use AGIS.NET to route through. Has anyone else had this problem as well? Or am I the unlucky one? ozzg@nmia.com From owner-list-managers-outgoing Thu May 1 23:43:54 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id XAA04677 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 1 May 1997 23:26:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id XAA04668 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 1 May 1997 23:25:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from proxy3.ba.best.com (proxy3.ba.best.com [206.184.139.14]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id XAA28816 for ; Tue, 29 Apr 1997 23:32:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shellx.best.com (shellx.best.com [206.86.0.11]) by proxy3.ba.best.com (8.8.5/8.8.3) with ESMTP id XAA25947 for ; Tue, 29 Apr 1997 23:33:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from cnorman@localhost) by shellx.best.com (8.8.5/8.8.3) id XAA00347; Tue, 29 Apr 1997 23:01:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 23:01:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199704300601.XAA00347@shellx.best.com> From: Cyndi Norman To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM CC: cnorman@shellx.best.com Subject: My vote for the DUH award Reply-to: cnorman@best.com Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk One of my list members wishes to leave the list. To this end, he has, in the last 2-3 days, sent off at least a dozen unsubscribe messages to the server. Many of them had the command unsubscribe repeated up to 3 times. Each has been processed with the reply "address not found." Today he mailed out 5 or 6 letters with the command unsubscribe all mailed to varying combinations of the server address, the list address, and the admin contact address. Then he mailed me the letter I have attached below (I have removed his name/address) -- the first of 4 in a row, btw. Sigh... Cyndi (p.s. obviously he is listed under an alternate address...and I have told him that.) ------- Start of forwarded message ------- To: immune@best.com From: [subscriber] Subject: List Server Error Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 21:58:49 -0700 >Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 21:50:19 -0700 (PDT) >From: immune-errors@lists.best.com >Sender: immune-errors@lists.best.com >To: [subscriber] >Subject: List Server Error > > >Your post did not go through because only subscribers are allowed >to post to the list. To subscribe, send email to >immune-request@lists.best.com. Use the following commands in >the body of your message: subsingle (regular list); subscribe >(digest list); or alias email_address (to be able to post from >your address without receiving posts.) >Mail any questions to immune@best.com > > >:From owner-immune Tue Apr 29 21:49:32 1997 >:Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 21:45:01 -0700 >:From: [subscriber] >:To: immune@lists.best.com >:CC: immune@best.com >:Subject: (no subject) >:Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >:Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >: >:unsubscribe >Cindi, please get me off this mailing list???????? Many thanks, in advance ------- End of forwarded message ------- From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 2 00:24:47 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id AAA08016 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 2 May 1997 00:09:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id AAA08006 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Fri, 2 May 1997 00:09:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from consensus.com (mail.consensus.com [157.22.240.7]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id RAA10710 for ; Thu, 1 May 1997 17:18:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dynamic-addr-192.consensus.com (157.22.240.192) by consensus.com with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1); Thu, 1 May 1997 17:18:33 -0700 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Organization: Consensus Development Corporation Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 17:18:59 -0700 To: "ListMom-Talk Discussion List" From: Christopher Allen Subject: Re: Need Sendmail Assistance Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 4:20 PM -0700 5/1/97, Vince Sabio wrote: >That's where *you* (yes, YOU) come in. If you're a sendmail hound with >lots of patience *and* the ability to read RFC822 mail typed with a >modest Indian accent, please respond to me directly so I can put you in >touch with him. He really seems interested in atoning for his sins -- or >at least fixing his mistake. Have him buy from Amazon.com the O'Reilly book SENDMAIL, 2nd edition. It is actually fairly good, more complete than just the RFCs, and is probably perfect for him. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ..Christopher Allen Consensus Development Corporation.. .. 1563 Solano Avenue #355.. .. Berkeley, CA 94707-2116.. ..Home of "SSL Plus: o510/559-1500 f510/559-1505.. .. SSL 3.0 Integration Suite(tm)" .. From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 2 09:09:31 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id JAA17688 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 2 May 1997 09:02:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gumby.combdyn.com (gumby.combdyn.com [192.203.203.5]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id JAA17641 for ; Fri, 2 May 1997 09:02:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from lawrence@localhost) by combdyn.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA16160 for List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM; Fri, 2 May 1997 10:03:43 -0600 (MDT) From: Lawrence Chen Message-Id: <199705021603.KAA16160@gumby.combdyn.com> Subject: Re: Need Sendmail Assistance To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM (List-Managers List) Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 10:03:42 -0600 (MDT) 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 > At 4:20 PM -0700 5/1/97, Vince Sabio wrote: > >That's where *you* (yes, YOU) come in. If you're a sendmail hound with > >lots of patience *and* the ability to read RFC822 mail typed with a > >modest Indian accent, please respond to me directly so I can put you in > >touch with him. He really seems interested in atoning for his sins -- or > >at least fixing his mistake. > > Have him buy from Amazon.com the O'Reilly book SENDMAIL, 2nd edition. It is > actually fairly good, more complete than just the RFCs, and is probably > perfect for him. > If he's running Sendmail 8.8.x is easy to turn this behaviour on...but its off by default.... >From the manual: UseErrorsTo If there is an "Errors-To:" header, send error messages to the address listed there. They normally go to the envelope sender. Use of this option causes sendmail to violate RFC 1123. The option is disrecommended and deprecated. -- Lawrence Chen, P.Eng. "The Dreamer" VE6LKC/VE6PAQ Computer/Research Engineer Email: lawrence@combdyn.com Combustion Dynamics Ltd. Phone: +1 403 529 2162 #203, 132 4th Avenue S.E. Fax: +1 403 529 2516 Medicine Hat, AB T1A 8B5 URL: http://www.combdyn.com "Just a Crazy Engineer with an Amiga and a Newton MP130" - The Dreamer From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 2 13:42:42 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id NAA23200 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 2 May 1997 13:31:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from colossus.arl.mil (colossus.arl.mil [131.218.204.98]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id NAA23153 for ; Fri, 2 May 1997 13:31:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [131.218.204.98] by colossus.arl.mil with ESMTP (Eudora Internet Mail Server 1.1.2); Fri, 2 May 1997 16:37:35 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199705021603.KAA16160@gumby.combdyn.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Organization: Little to None X-Mailer: Eudora 3.0 for Cray Y-MP Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 16:37:25 -0400 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM (List-Managers List), listmom-talk@skyweyr.com From: Vince Sabio Subject: Re: Need Sendmail Assistance Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk ** Sometime around 10:03 -0600 5/2/97, Lawrence Chen sent everyone: >> At 4:20 PM -0700 5/1/97, Vince Sabio wrote: >> >That's where *you* (yes, YOU) come in. If you're a sendmail hound with >> >lots of patience *and* the ability to read RFC822 mail typed with a >> >modest Indian accent, please respond to me directly so I can put you in >> >touch with him. He really seems interested in atoning for his sins -- or >> >at least fixing his mistake. >> >If he's running Sendmail 8.8.x is easy to turn this behaviour on...but its >off by default.... > >From the manual: > >UseErrorsTo > >If there is an "Errors-To:" header, send error messages to the address listed >there. They normally go to the envelope sender. Use of this option causes >sendmail to violate RFC 1123. The option is disrecommended and deprecated. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Ya gotta love a manual with a sense of humor. However, using "Errors-To" would not have solved his problem, since not all MLMs use that header entry; in fact, most of the ones that I know use the "Sender" header line. In any event, though -- and to follow up with the lists -- I now have a sendmail aficionado following up with the guy, so hopefully he'll get his act together. One down, 34971 more to go ... - Vince S. wavelet@colossus.arl.mil "So many idiots; so few comets." From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 2 23:09:32 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id XAA19506 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 2 May 1997 23:00:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nmia.com (socrates.nmia.com [198.59.166.170]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id XAA19498 for ; Fri, 2 May 1997 23:00:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from plato.nmia.com by nmia.com with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.29.1 #3) id m0wNXtk-001JXGC; Sat, 3 May 97 00:02 MDT Date: Sat, 3 May 1997 00:02:20 -0600 (MDT) From: Ozz Graham To: jonathon cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: New here In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > Except the problem to get worse -- far worse, before it gets > better, if it gets better. One thing that doesn't make sense is that I can email the user no problem, she can email me, as well as I can email the System Adminstrator with no problem either. All notes go thru, however, my mailing list software comes back with an error that says its timing out. I send out in digest format only, no single message mailings go out. Hows that for a question? Ozz From owner-list-managers-outgoing Mon May 5 13:24:46 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id NAA18385 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 5 May 1997 13:11:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from colossus.arl.mil (colossus.arl.mil [131.218.204.98]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id NAA18290 for ; Mon, 5 May 1997 13:11:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [131.218.204.98] by colossus.arl.mil with ESMTP (Eudora Internet Mail Server 1.1.2); Mon, 5 May 1997 16:10:46 -0400 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Organization: Little to None X-Mailer: Eudora 3.0 for Cray Y-MP Date: Mon, 5 May 1997 16:10:26 -0400 To: listmom-talk@skyweyr.com, List-Managers@greatcircle.com From: Vince Sabio Subject: Re: Need Sendmail Assistance Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk ** Sometime around 11:31 -0400 5/3/97, Keith Moore said: >> I have some poor sysadmin in India who has sendmail set up to bounce >> messages back to the "From:" address -- not the "Sender" or "Errors-To" >> address, if one is present. > >Bouncing to either the Sender or the Errors-To address is also wrong. >Mail bounces go to the envelope return-path, period. As I understand it: 1. Return-path is not always provided (e.g., LISTSERV and ListProc use Sender). 2. "Sender" is legal according to RFC822. If that has been negated by a downstream RFC, I'm not aware of it. Also, I never *endorsed* the use of "Errors-To" (and do not recommend its use), but it is better than blindly using the address on the From line. (Well, IMO. Which certainly ain't perfekt.) >At any rate, this is almost certainly not a sendmail configuration error. >Sendmail bounces mail to the right place, (unless you enable ErrorsTo >processing). More likely, there is some upstream gateway which is >filtering out the envelope sender information. >From what I can gather (or, more accurately, from what the person who is helping out the confused sysadmin has gathered), it seems as if sendmail is trying to deliver the message TO the address on the From line, rather than bouncing it as it should; this behavior seems to have been caused by a configuration error on the part of the sysadmin. In any event, as I mentioned in a subsequent message, there is now someone with sendmail experience helping out the sysadmin in this case, so it should [hopefully] be getting resolved. - Vince S. wavelet@colossus.arl.mil -- For info on HumourNet--the Internet's moderated mailing list for humor-- send the command INFO HUMORNET (only one U) to listproc@csf.colorado.edu -- Because The Only GOOD Spammer is a DEAD Spammer From owner-list-managers-outgoing Mon May 5 13:40:20 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id NAA21380 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 5 May 1997 13:33:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sacmgr.mp.usbr.gov (sacmgr.mp.usbr.gov [140.214.12.4]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id NAA21318 for ; Mon, 5 May 1997 13:33:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by sacto.mp.usbr.gov (MX V4.2A VAX) id 1; Mon, 05 May 1997 13:35:23 PDT Date: Mon, 05 May 1997 13:35:21 PDT From: "Henry W. Miller" To: list-abuse@clio.lyris.net, list-managers@greatcircle.com CC: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009B3CE1.A484F860.1@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: Prelude to a SPAM? Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Sorry for the double posting, but I just saw this in my mail queue (I'm running the MX package for VMS) and it excited my suspicion: 12 CANCLD 0 SMTP 14 FINISH 855 MAIL %MCP-I-QENTRIES, total matching entries: 10 MCP> que show/full 12 Entry: 12, Origin unknown Status: CANCELLED, size: 0 bytes Created: 5-MAY-1997 13:25:27.78, expires 4-JUN-1997 13:25:27.78 Last modified 5-MAY-1997 13:25:28.52 %MCP-I-QENTRIES, total matching entries: 1 MCP> Exit SACUSR>whois yoyo.com Yoyodyne Entertainment (YOYO-DOM) 200 Boston Ave. Suite 1800 Medford, MA 02155 Domain Name: YOYO.COM Administrative Contact: Lovy, Dan (DL375) dlovy@WORLD.STD.COM 617-395-1957 (FAX) 617-395-3937 Technical Contact, Zone Contact: DNS Administrations (DA41-ORG) dnsadmin@BITWISE.NET (617) 261-4700 Fax: (617) 261-7788 Billing Contact: Lovy, Dan (DL375) dlovy@WORLD.STD.COM 617-395-1957 (FAX) 617-395-3937 Record last updated on 27-Apr-97. Record created on 28-Nov-94. Database last updated on 5-May-97 06:01:19 EDT. Domain servers in listed order: BITWISE.NET 204.97.222.2 NS1.SPRINTLINK.NET 204.117.214.10 NS2.BITWISE.NET 204.97.222.5 The InterNIC Registration Services Host contains ONLY Internet Information (Networks, ASN's, Domains, and POC's). Please use the whois server at nic.ddn.mil for MILNET Information. Has anyone else seen a suspicious incomplete message flaoting around their system like this? -HWM From owner-list-managers-outgoing Mon May 5 14:40:08 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id OAA00646 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 5 May 1997 14:37:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from atheria.europa.com (atheria.europa.com [199.2.194.10]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id OAA00622 for ; Mon, 5 May 1997 14:37:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from thetics.europa.com(really [199.2.194.14]) by atheria.europa.com via sendmail with smtp id for ; Mon, 5 May 1997 14:39:24 -0700 (PDT) (Smail-3.2.0.91 1997-Jan-14 #4 built 1997-Jan-19) Date: Mon, 5 May 1997 14:39:23 -0700 (PDT) From: kali To: "Henry W. Miller" cc: list-abuse@clio.lyris.net, list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Prelude to a SPAM? In-Reply-To: <009B3CE1.A484F860.1@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > 12 CANCLD 0 SMTP > SACUSR>whois yoyo.com > Yoyodyne Entertainment (YOYO-DOM) > 200 Boston Ave. Suite 1800 > Medford, MA 02155 > > Domain Name: YOYO.COM > > Has anyone else seen a suspicious incomplete message flaoting > around their system like this? I don't about the other thing, but yoyo.com and the dogbertmailer are totally legit (and cool!) things. Yoyodyne runs contests for several different businesses and organizations (including Rolling Stone and other big ones), they also happen to run the Dilbert (popular comic strip) stuff. One of their "newsletters" for Dilbert is dogbertmailer@yoyo.com and they are very good about sending it only to people that request it. It may have been a "forged" subscription, but this address is legit and not related to spamming. -kali From owner-list-managers-outgoing Mon May 5 22:39:38 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id WAA10848 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 5 May 1997 22:24:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sacmgr.mp.usbr.gov (sacmgr.mp.usbr.gov [140.214.12.4]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id WAA10816 for ; Mon, 5 May 1997 22:24:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by sacto.mp.usbr.gov (MX V4.2A VAX) id 5; Mon, 05 May 1997 22:26:30 PDT Date: Mon, 05 May 1997 22:26:27 PDT From: "Henry W. Miller" To: kali@europa.com CC: list-abuse@clio.lyris.net, list-managers@greatcircle.com, henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009B3D2B.D694FB30.5@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: Re: Prelude to a SPAM? Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > From: MX%"kali@europa.com" "kali" 5-MAY-1997 14:39:52.98 > Subj: Re: Prelude to a SPAM? > > 12 CANCLD 0 SMTP > > > SACUSR>whois yoyo.com > > Yoyodyne Entertainment (YOYO-DOM) > > 200 Boston Ave. Suite 1800 > > Medford, MA 02155 > > > > Domain Name: YOYO.COM > > > > Has anyone else seen a suspicious incomplete message flaoting > > around their system like this? > > I don't about the other thing, but yoyo.com and the dogbertmailer are > totally legit (and cool!) things. Yoyodyne runs contests for several > different businesses and organizations (including Rolling Stone and other > big ones), they also happen to run the Dilbert (popular comic strip) > stuff. One of their "newsletters" for Dilbert is dogbertmailer@yoyo.com > and they are very good about sending it only to people that request it. > > It may have been a "forged" subscription, but this address is legit and > not related to spamming. > > -kali > Kali, Thanks for that update. I'm not really the paranoid type, but it just looked a little too suspicious for me. -HWM From owner-list-managers-outgoing Tue May 6 03:39:43 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id DAA20218 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 6 May 1997 03:12:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 205.160.21.65 (ec2.earthchannel.com [205.160.21.65]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id DAA20195 for ; Tue, 6 May 1997 03:11:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ec12.earthchannel.com (unverified [205.160.21.75]) by ec3.earthchannel.com (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.83) with SMTP id ; Tue, 06 May 1997 06:13:48 -0400 Message-ID: Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Gess Shankar" Organization: Earth Channel Communications LLC To: list-abuse@clio.lyris.net, list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Tue, 6 May 1997 06:11:26 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Prelude to a SPAM? Reply-to: gess@earthchannel.com In-reply-to: <009B3D2B.D694FB30.5@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.53/R1) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 5 May 97 at 22:26, Henry W. Miller wrote: > > > > It may have been a "forged" subscription, but this address is legit and > > not related to spamming. > > Thanks for that update. I'm not really the paranoid type, but it > just looked a little too suspicious for me. > Legit or not, they sure are sending UCE out big time. A snippet from their longish email follows. BTW: I am NOT one of their esteemed players. I had never heard of them before and I have not played any games as they claim. My lists have not been hit yet, however. Received: by lizardo.yoyo.com (AIX 4.1/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA66078; Mon, 5 May 1997 22:19:39 -0400 Date: Mon, 5 May 1997 22:19:39 -0400 Message-Id: <9705060219.AA66078@lizardo.yoyo.com> To: gess@earthchannel.com X-Yoyodyne: Yoyodyne Entertainment From: Yoyodyne Entertainment Reply-To: yoyomailer@yoyo.com Subject: Read This and You Could Win $100 from Yoyodyne! X-PMFLAGS: 33554560 0 ---------------------- THE YOYODYNE QUARTERLY ---------------------- Greetings from Yoyodyne! Now that spring is here, we're announcing some new games and new prizes. The games are fun and the prizes range from a trip to the Caribbean to money, money, money. We're not kidding! Last year, we awarded *a million dollars* to Ray Burns (of Lancaster, PA) who played one of our games. Read on to find out how you could win a cool hundred bucks right now.... ---------------------------- Why You're Getting This Mail ---------------------------- You are one of our esteemed players, and we want to keep you amused, entertained, and informed. So that's why we're sending you this quarterly Yoyodyne update. [etc etc] Gess :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Gess Shankar pax vobiscum gess@earthchannel.com http://www.earthchannel.com Earth Channel Communications, LLC. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: From owner-list-managers-outgoing Wed May 7 18:29:30 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id SAA12081 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 May 1997 18:18:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id SAA12070 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Wed, 7 May 1997 18:18:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mushi.colo.neosoft.com (mushi.colo.neosoft.com [206.109.6.82]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id XAA24508 for ; Mon, 5 May 1997 23:43:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 4364 invoked from network); 6 May 1997 06:46:20 -0000 Received: from bonkers.neosoft.com (HELO bonkers.taronga.com) (root@206.109.2.48) by mushi.colo.neosoft.com with SMTP; 6 May 1997 06:46:20 -0000 Received: (from arielle@localhost) by bonkers.taronga.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id BAA04282 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Tue, 6 May 1997 01:46:07 -0500 From: arielle@taronga.com (Stephanie da Silva) Message-Id: <199705060646.BAA04282@bonkers.taronga.com> Subject: Re: The "Duh!" Awards To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Tue, 6 May 1997 01:46:07 -0500 (CDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > It's time for a new class, the "Duh" Award. I bring this up > because it has happened to me twice in the past week and a half. Here's mine. I occasionally get people saying "please unsubscribe me from your list." This isn't particularly intuitive, since I have 5 lists runnign on my server, only two of them mine. Plus because of the PAML, people will ask me to unsubscribe me to lists I have nothing to do with, but that's another story. Anyhow, this must hit the very bottom of the clueless meter. Recent exchange: CL: Please unsubscribe me from your mailing list. Me: Before I can do this, you'll need to tell me the name of the list. CL: I don't know.... From owner-list-managers-outgoing Wed May 7 18:41:37 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id SAA12021 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 May 1997 18:17:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id SAA12003 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Wed, 7 May 1997 18:17:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from miles.greatcircle.com (miles.greatcircle.com [198.102.244.34]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id RAA04143 for ; Mon, 5 May 1997 17:47:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lucius.ultra.net (lucius.ultra.net [199.232.56.38]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Miles-970308-2) with ESMTP id RAA05974 for ; Mon, 5 May 1997 17:18:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from voyager (d11.dial-2.wal.ma.ultra.net [146.115.77.43]) by lucius.ultra.net (8.8.5/ult1.05) with SMTP id UAA32384; Mon, 5 May 1997 20:16:40 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19970506001724.0030368c@pop.ma.ultranet.com> X-Sender: stanr@pop.ma.ultranet.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 05 May 1997 20:17:24 -0400 To: listmom-talk@skyweyr.com, List-Managers@greatcircle.com From: Stan Ryckman Subject: Re: Need Sendmail Assistance Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 04:10 PM 5/5/97 -0400, Vince Sabio wrote: >** Sometime around 11:31 -0400 5/3/97, Keith Moore said: > >>> I have some poor sysadmin in India who has sendmail set up to bounce >>> messages back to the "From:" address -- not the "Sender" or "Errors-To" >>> address, if one is present. >> >>Bouncing to either the Sender or the Errors-To address is also wrong. >>Mail bounces go to the envelope return-path, period. > >As I understand it: > >1. Return-path is not always provided (e.g., LISTSERV and ListProc use >Sender). Actually, if present, it's provided locally at delivery. From RFC822: 4.3.1. RETURN-PATH This field is added by the final transport system that delivers the message to its recipient. The field is intended to contain definitive information about the address and route back to the message's originator. Note: The "Reply-To" field is added by the originator and serves to direct replies, whereas the "Return-Path" field is used to identify a path back to the origina- tor. While the syntax indicates that a route specification is optional, every attempt should be made to provide that infor- mation in this field. Thus it has nothing to do with what various MLMs use to identify themselves in RFC822 headers. Note, however, the key word "envelope" that Keith used. This is discussed in RFC1123; check out 5.3.3 and 5.3.6 there, in particular. Also, I find it surprising that 5.3.7(E) is a SHOULD rather than a MUST (this talks about gateways, though). Cheers, Stan From owner-list-managers-outgoing Wed May 7 18:55:08 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id SAA11729 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 May 1997 18:15:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id SAA11701 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Wed, 7 May 1997 18:14:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hustle.rahul.net (hustle.rahul.net [192.160.13.2]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id KAA20107; Mon, 5 May 1997 10:06:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by hustle.rahul.net with UUCP id AA27388 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5); Mon, 5 May 1997 10:08:42 -0700 Received: from antares.starshine.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by antares.starshine.org (8.8.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id JAA11274; Mon, 5 May 1997 09:59:58 -0700 Message-Id: <199705051659.JAA11274@antares.starshine.org> To: Jerry Peek Cc: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com, list-managers@greatcircle.com, ftpmail-workers@doc.ic.ac.uk X-Mailer: MH 8.6.3 Subject: Re: Reviewers needed for MIIS book chapters In-Reply-To: <18685.857757471@hrothgar.gw.com> Message Apparently From Jerry Peek Dated Fri, 07 Mar 1997 09:57:51 PST. Date: Mon, 05 May 1997 09:59:57 -0700 From: Jim Dennis Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > The second edition of O'Reilly's "Managing Internet Information Services" > is coming soon. Like the first edition, it has a section about email > services: two chapters cover mailing lists in general, two cover > Majordomo 1.94.1, and one is about ftpmail. I'm looking for reviewers > who'll read the draft section thoroughly and give me detailed feedback. > > I'd like to get a mix of experts and newbies. I especially need > a couple of reviewers who will *do* the installation instructions > (not just read them and say "hmm, that seems okay"). If you can > help, please send me email. Tell me about your background and your > experience with email services. The review starts mid-March. > > Thanks (from me and the book's future readers)! Reviewers' work > is always a big help; it makes the book clearer for other readers. > -- > Jerry Peek, jpeek@jpeek.com, http://www.jpeek.com/~jpeek/ Jerry, Is it too late to sign up for this review cycle? I've read the first edition of this book -- and I've reviewed other books for O'Reilly in the past. My consulting service provides Unix sysadmin support and training. So a large part of what I do involves the installation, configuration, upgrade, tuning and troubleshooting of Internet and intranet services. I've used almost every chapter of your book many times. (I haven't set up any WAIS or Gopher servers yet -- they seem to be a dying breed). I've also written articles that will soon be appearing in SysAdmin Magazine and in The Linux Journal (these have already been accepted). Please let me know if you need any other details. -- Jim Dennis, info@mail.starshine.org Proprietor, consulting@mail.starshine.org Starshine Technical Services http://www.starshine.org PGP 1024/2ABF03B1 Jim Dennis Key fingerprint = 2524E3FEF0922A84 A27BDEDB38EBB95A From owner-list-managers-outgoing Wed May 7 18:59:58 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id SAA12930 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 May 1997 18:28:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id SAA12921 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Wed, 7 May 1997 18:28:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dream.vol.net.mt (dream.vol.net.mt [194.166.35.200]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id EAA00295 for ; Wed, 7 May 1997 04:02:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [194.166.35.199] (svastara.vol.net.mt) by dream.vol.net.mt with ESMTP (1.39.111.2/16.2) id AA149993158; Wed, 7 May 1997 13:05:58 +0200 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 13:08:13 +0100 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: "Ljubisa Gavrilovic (LJ)" Subject: help Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I have installed the majordomo on Linux. The programs are working fine but there is some problem that i cannot figure out why it is happening. The error occurs when someone tries to unsubscribe from the open list. Error generated is the following: Users response: > >>>> unsubscribe jokes > >>> Sorry, an error has occurred while processing your request > >>> The caretaker of Majordomo ( Lists-Owner@hope.vol.net.mt ) has been >notified > >>> of the problem. Owner notification: MAJORDOMO ABORT (mj_majordomo)!! chmod(33204, "/home/lists/majordomo-1.94.1/lists/jokes.new"): Operation not permitted the files have permits and ownership as specified: ~~$ pwd /home/lists ~~$ ll total 3 drwx------ 2 lists maillist 1024 Feb 14 07:38 Mail lrwxrwxrwx 1 lists maillist 11 Feb 11 20:19 majordomo-1.94.1 -> majordomo_f drwxrwx--x 8 lists maillist 1024 May 6 17:54 majordomo_f ~~/majordomo_f$ pwd /home/lists/majordomo_f ~~/majordomo_f$ ll total 252 -rw-rw-r-- 1 lists maillist 12296 May 6 17:54 Log drwxr-xr-x 2 lists maillist 1024 Feb 11 20:03 Tools drwxrwxr-x 2 lists maillist 1024 Feb 14 08:54 archive -rwxr-xr-x 1 lists maillist 4707 Feb 11 20:03 archive2.pl drwxr-xr-x 2 lists maillist 1024 Feb 11 20:03 bin -rwxr-xr-x 1 lists maillist 2795 Feb 11 20:03 bounce-remind -rwxr-xr-x 1 lists maillist 10499 Feb 11 20:03 config-test -rwxr-xr-x 1 lists maillist 47831 Feb 11 20:03 config_parse.pl -rwxr-xr-x 1 lists maillist 12071 Feb 11 20:03 digest drwxrwxr-x 2 lists maillist 1024 May 7 03:46 lists drwxr-xr-x 3 lists maillist 1024 Feb 11 20:12 mail -rwxr-xr-x 1 lists maillist 57248 Feb 11 21:18 majordomo -rw-r--r-- 1 lists maillist 10033 Feb 14 08:47 majordomo.cf -rwxr-xr-x 1 lists maillist 23624 Feb 11 20:03 majordomo.pl -rwxr-xr-x 1 lists maillist 137 Feb 11 20:03 majordomo_version.pl drwxr-xr-x 4 lists maillist 1024 Feb 11 20:03 man -rwxr-xr-x 1 lists maillist 3532 Feb 11 20:03 request-answer -rwxr-xr-x 1 lists maillist 30128 Feb 11 20:03 resend -rw-r--r-- 1 lists maillist 10023 Feb 11 20:03 sample.cf -rwxr-xr-x 1 lists maillist 7873 Feb 11 20:03 shlock.pl -rwxr-xr-x 1 lists maillist 6497 Feb 11 20:32 wrapper ~~/majordomo_f$ cd lists ~~/majordomo_f/lists$ ll total 45 -rw-rw-r-- 1 lists maillist 183 May 6 18:59 jokes -rw-rw-r-- 1 lists maillist 0 Feb 11 21:09 jokes.auto -rw-rw-r-- 1 lists maillist 423 Feb 15 16:04 jokes.config -rw-rw-r-- 1 lists maillist 698 Feb 13 12:53 jokes.info -rw-rw-r-- 1 lists maillist 0 May 6 17:54 jokes.new -rw-rw-r-- 1 lists maillist 14814 Feb 11 21:48 jokes.old.config -rw-rw-r-- 1 lists maillist 11 Feb 11 21:34 jokes.passwd I'm running majordomo version 1.94.1. Any suggestions how to fix a problem? Best regards, Ljubisa Gavrilovic Malta From owner-list-managers-outgoing Wed May 7 19:10:09 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id SAA13354 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 7 May 1997 18:30:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id SAA13346 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Wed, 7 May 1997 18:30:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from chrome.office.aol.com (chrome.office.aol.com [152.163.67.244]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id KAA05908 for ; Wed, 7 May 1997 10:49:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (brad@localhost) by chrome.office.aol.com (8.8.6.Alpha2/8.8.5/AOL-0.0.7) with ESMTP id NAA28668; Wed, 7 May 1997 13:51:37 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199705071751.NAA28668@chrome.office.aol.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0gamma 1/27/96 Reply-To: KnowlesB@aol.net Organization: America Online, Inc. X-Telefacsimile: (703) 453-4013 X-PGP-Fingerprint: DA 2A 59 B1 A8 BD 4C B2 B0 41 CE 6E BD C3 15 54 X-Face: "HJz{@e(gkOmJfq8b$n:zW8Kk4*`Sz1?<#`g=5p>Wuu7DkDV`m-*p[Yb=?;w(F:L'DHA{mO]=iKKKdH)r%I7K;dvYQ{3Y6"3MW@Y*U_6?>lOw;GIva\?7579Ii|/$t"\+lE, Michael Ramundo , Jeff Kell , Pete Weiss , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, Eric Thomas Subject: Re: rejected mail - RFC822 conflict ??? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 13:51:36 -0400 From: Brad Knowles Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Folks, I've been informed that there is some discussion going on in these two lists regarding our refusal to accept source-routed mail. Well, it's true. We do refuse to accept email with source-routed envelope addresses. I also know what RFC 1123, section 5.2.19 says. I'm also on the IETF DRUMS WG, and I know what the upcoming drafts say with regards to refusing mail (see section 7.5 of ). I quote: It is a well-established principle that an SMTP server may refuse to accept mail for any operational or technical reason that makes sense to the site providing the server. Specifically, source-routed mail has historically been the source of no end of problems, and frequently abused by less savoury types in attempts to ensure that they don't have to deal with their bounces, etc..., we consider this an operational issue and will refuse to accept mail with source-routed envelope addresses. Our general approach is one whereby if we can't determine that we could bounce a message if we had to (i.e., a message comes in for a nonexistant AOL user, or for one whose mailbox is full), then we won't accept that message. The standards are much more forceful on the issue of accepting full responsibility for a mail message once you've accepted the message itself, and that responsibility extends to delivering error messages back to the sender if there is some sort of problem. At some point in time, the RFC 1123 "Robustness Principle" (section 1.1.2) continues the propagation of more and more bad systems, because properly behaved systems are required to continue to be tolerant of poor behaviour, thus ensuring that we'll *never* free ourselves from those shackles. Essentially as much has been observed by various Internet mail experts, many of whom are working on drafting the upcoming standards. I know that I will personally work to ensure that source-routed email is deprecated as much as possible, preferably to the status of "MUST NOT generate/MUST NOT accept". In the meanwhile, AOL will refuse to accept email with source-routed envelope addresses, and I'll contribute my sendmail.cf rewrite rules to Eric Allman in hopes that I can convince him to incorporate them in an upcoming release of sendmail (at least as a FEATURE() you can turn on, if not turned on by default). As Jeff Kell noted on LSTOWN-L, since you can change the configuration of ListServ so that it doesn't generate source-routed email messages, this shouldn't pose too big of a problem for you. I'd like to see this default changed in upcoming releases of ListServ, so that in the future, email with source-routed envelope addresses will not be generated unless you explicitly configure it to do so. -- Brad Knowles MIME/PGP: KnowlesB@aol.net Senior Unix Administrator -- Brad Knowles MIME/PGP: KnowlesB@aol.net Senior Unix Administrator From owner-list-managers-outgoing Thu May 8 03:43:23 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id DAA22449 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 8 May 1997 03:35:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ozemail.com.au (server3.syd.mail.ozemail.net [203.108.7.41]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id DAA22438 for ; Thu, 8 May 1997 03:35:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from home-computer (syd02-144.magna.com.au [203.111.80.144]) by ozemail.com.au (8.8.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA13759 for ; Thu, 8 May 1997 20:35:01 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <3371AC1F.E09@ozemail.com.au> Date: Thu, 08 May 1997 20:34:07 +1000 From: Graeme Read & Grant Whittingham Reply-To: whitread@ozemail.com.au X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Threats from an unsubscribed list member Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi fellow list managers, I've been on this list for several months and appreciated the policy and technical tips that you have all contributed. Sometimes the software talk is a little over my head but it's only by reading this stuff that it will start to make sense and sink in. I run a list for approximately 200 people. There hasn't been any of the real drama mentioned by some of you as happening on your lists (the death threat, legal action situations come to mind). Well, until now. About two months ago I subscribed someone to the list who began causing a lot of trouble by sending multiple posts day after day, contributing nothing to the discussion and often just seeming to indulge in self promotion. He immediately had a large chunk of the list subscribers offside and the complaints started rolling in. As I started the list with a policy of open discussion and "sensible freedom of speech" I didn't take any action, hoping he would get sick of it and calm down. Disturbingly, he also seemed to gain a small but vocal support group on the list. I was dealing with an incensed "silent majority" whilst he claimed the moral high ground and pointed to his supporters as validating anything he choose to send to the list. After a warning to him that was ignored and two months worth of sarcastic comments about me posted to the list, not to mention a number of complaints from normally quiet subscribers, I have been forced, reluctantly, to unsubscribe him. The first person I've unsubscribed for such a reason. I wrote a letter to my list explaining why I had done it and, to my surprise, I have received about 12 replies thanking me and telling me not to worry about it. I have had reason to doubt his emotional stability at times during the last two months but a post I received tonight has confirmed that there is something definitely wrong with him. It was a tirade of personal abuse accusing me of being a dictator amongst other things I'd rather not go into here. More disturbingly he made a couple of very clear threats - that I had met my "Waterloo" in him and that he would do everything he could to oppose me, the list and have it shut down. You people have had much more experience in dealing with this kind of thing than me. What should I do about the situation? Should I be worried? Should I take any action? I admit that it has shaken me up somewhat. Your advice would be appreciated. Graeme Read Sydney, Australia whitread@ozemail.com.au From owner-list-managers-outgoing Thu May 8 05:58:25 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id FAA00440 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 8 May 1997 05:50:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from heimdall-nf1.usafa.af.mil (HEIMDALL.USAFA.AF.MIL [204.34.211.17]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id FAA00432 for ; Thu, 8 May 1997 05:50:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.usafa.af.mil by heimdall-nf1.usafa.af.mil via smtpd (for honor.greatcircle.com [198.102.244.44]) with SMTP; 8 May 1997 12:50:38 UT Received: from vulcan.usafa.af.mil by atlas.usafa.af.mil (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id GAA29431; Thu, 8 May 1997 06:47:07 -0600 Received: from hellcat by vulcan.usafa.af.mil (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id GAA21641; Thu, 8 May 1997 06:44:36 -0600 From: satin@vulcan.usafa.af.mil (Satin Zeine-Johnson) Received: by hellcat (SMI-8.6) id GAA03025; Thu, 8 May 1997 06:48:29 -0600 Date: Thu, 8 May 1997 06:48:29 -0600 Message-Id: <199705081248.GAA03025@hellcat> To: jpeek@jpeek.com Subject: Re: Reviewers needed for MIIS book chapters Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > > > > The second edition of O'Reilly's "Managing Internet Information Services" > > is coming soon. Like the first edition, it has a section about email > > services: two chapters cover mailing lists in general, two cover > > Majordomo 1.94.1, and one is about ftpmail. I'm looking for reviewers > > who'll read the draft section thoroughly and give me detailed feedback. > > Yeah! I need this book. I will be happy to review, if you still need people. I am currently the Internet Services Administrator at the US Air Force Academy. I have minimal sysadmin skills. Mostly the ones relating to the WWW, listservers, etc. I run the majordomo list server here, have installed NEWS, that sort of thing... I have huge sysadmin skill gaps because I dont do it or have the opportunity to do so much. Anything that helps me figure out why majordomo is blowing up or my news server is having a cow is a blessing! Sendmail is in the category of "need to learn" "when I can get a chance". > > I'd like to get a mix of experts and newbies. I especially need > > a couple of reviewers who will *do* the installation instructions > > (not just read them and say "hmm, that seems okay"). If you can > > help, please send me email. Tell me about your background and your > > experience with email services. The review starts mid-March. > > I think I AM a mix of expert and newbie - depends on what part of the system you mean I will also do the install instructions for different things, if you need me to. > > Thanks (from me and the book's future readers)! Reviewers' work > > is always a big help; it makes the book clearer for other readers. Hope I can help. Satin Zeine-Johnson, GS-12, DAF USAFA Internet Services Administator/Postmaster 10th ComSq/SCBNI, US Air Force Academy http://www.usafa.af.mil/ O- Dea Reticula Computers are like Old Testament gods; lots of rules and no mercy. -- Joseph Campbell From owner-list-managers-outgoing Thu May 8 07:20:14 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id HAA06753 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 8 May 1997 07:00:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from grinch.whoville.leftbank.com (grinch.leftbank.com [139.167.128.2]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id HAA06726 for ; Thu, 8 May 1997 07:00:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zax.whoville.leftbank.com by grinch.whoville.leftbank.com via smtpd (for honor.greatcircle.com [198.102.244.44]) with SMTP; 8 May 1997 14:00:32 UT Received: (from nmehl@localhost) by zax.leftbank.com (8.7.5/8.7.3/LeftBank-1.1/http://www.leftbank.com/) id KAA21444; Thu, 8 May 1997 10:01:11 -0400 (EDT) From: "Nathan J. Mehl" Message-Id: <199705081401.KAA21444@zax.leftbank.com> Subject: Re: Threats from an unsubscribed list member To: whitread@ozemail.com.au Date: Thu, 8 May 1997 10:01:10 -0400 (EDT) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <3371AC1F.E09@ozemail.com.au> from "Graeme Read & Grant Whittingham" at May 8, 97 08:34:07 pm X-Abby-Says: Nathan, you keep getting to be the first person who does things to me X-My-Minions: Took over Lunacon...and Minbar. 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 In the immortal words of Graeme Read & Grant Whittingham: > More disturbingly he made a couple of very clear > threats - that I had met my "Waterloo" in him and that he would do > everything he could to oppose me, the list and have it shut down. > You people have had much more experience in dealing with this kind of > thing than me. What should I do about the situation? Should I be > worried? Should I take any action? By and large, my advice would be to ignore it. People who actually have the technical skills to follow up on threats of this nature are an extremely tiny subset of the ones that actually make the threats. More than likely, you're deal with yet another of the emotionally stunted sociopath crew that make administering any public resource on the net such a royal pain in the ass occasionially. If he's making legal threats, say "I'm sorry, but if you're threatening a lawsuit, I can no longer speak with you. Please direct any further communication to my lawer at this address..." If he's threatening technical disruption of the list, save a few of the messages and go to his sysadmin and/or the police. If he's just venting personal abuse, set up a filter to bounce his email. Best of luck, -n -- Don't blame me -- I voted for the Unabomber! Nathan J. Mehl -- The Left Bank Operation (work) nmehl@leftbank.com -- http://www.leftbank.com (play) memory@blank.org -- http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/nmehl/ From owner-list-managers-outgoing Thu May 8 11:14:28 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id LAA26494 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 8 May 1997 11:04:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from webster.m-w.com ([206.98.43.4]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id LAA26475 for ; Thu, 8 May 1997 11:04:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by m-w.com (NeXT-1.0 (From Sendmail 5.52)/NeXT-2.0) id AA18078; Thu, 8 May 97 13:51:26 EDT Date: Thu, 8 May 97 13:51:26 EDT From: awest@webster.m-w.com (Amy West) Message-Id: <9705081751.AA18078@m-w.com> To: List-Managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: List-Managers-Digest's message of Thu, 8 May 1997 01:00:30 -0700 (PDT) <199705080800.BAA10566@honor.greatcircle.com> Subject: announcement list on listproc vs. majordomo Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk So, we don't have an MLM installed yet, and I'm trying to decide which is best for doing an announcement list (where only 1 or 2 people are allowed to post). Anyone have any experience setting up such a list on ListProc or Majordomo and an opinion as to the ease of doing it? Also, anyone have any experiences installing and running either MLM on a NeXT? I've been cut-off from my newsserver for a bit and can't get to the comp.sys.next.sysadmin group to ask. Thanks, Amy From owner-list-managers-outgoing Thu May 8 16:58:22 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id QAA02537 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 8 May 1997 16:43:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ariel.macarthur.uws.EDU.AU (ariel.macarthur.uws.EDU.AU [137.154.72.5]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id QAA02519 for ; Thu, 8 May 1997 16:42:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from CAROL_OLIVER.MACARTHUR.UWS.EDU.AU ([137.154.77.99]) by ariel.macarthur.uws.EDU.AU (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id JAA27438; Fri, 9 May 1997 09:42:21 +1100 Message-Id: <199705082242.JAA27438@ariel.macarthur.uws.EDU.AU> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Carol Oliver" Organization: UWS Macarthur To: "Nathan J. Mehl" Date: Fri, 9 May 1997 10:44:17 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Threats from an unsubscribed list member CC: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-reply-to: <199705081401.KAA21444@zax.leftbank.com> References: <3371AC1F.E09@ozemail.com.au> from "Graeme Read & Grant Whittingham" at May 8, 97 08:34:07 pm X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.52) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In the immortal words of Graeme Read & Grant Whittingham: > More disturbingly he made a couple of very clear > threats - that I had met my "Waterloo" in him and that he would do > everything he could to oppose me, the list and have it shut down. > You people have had much more experience in dealing with this kind of > thing than me. What should I do about the situation? Should I be > worried? Should I take any action? I agree with Nathan's sentiments, especially on bouncing the mail. This guy needs a stage...I wouldn't give to him, even off the list. Not worth your time. Carol Oliver University of Western Sydney Macarthur From owner-list-managers-outgoing Thu May 8 19:58:26 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id TAA00685 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 8 May 1997 19:52:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shell.wco.com (shell.wco.com [199.4.94.16]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id TAA00669 for ; Thu, 8 May 1997 19:52:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from default (volans103.wco.com [207.48.88.103]) by shell.wco.com (8.8.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA13313; Thu, 8 May 1997 19:52:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970508195021.010a4748@mail.wco.com> X-Sender: 2bits@mail.wco.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Thu, 08 May 1997 19:52:21 -0700 To: whitread@ozemail.com.au From: "Todd O." <2bits@wco.com> Subject: Re: Threats from an unsubscribed list member Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 08:34 PM 5/8/97 +1000, Graeme Read & Grant Whittingham wrote: >You people have had much more experience in dealing with this kind of >thing than me. What should I do about the situation? Should I be >worried? Should I take any action? Graeme: I had a similar situation with a disturb fellow with much too much time on his hands and trouble in his mind. I found the following to be helpful in my successful efforts to dispose of him. (1) I had very clear written guidelines that did not allow abusive or exploitive behavior on the list. Within the same document, I reserved the right to remove anyone from the list who got out of hand, to contact their ISP if they persisted in abusing their net access to the detriment of the list or its subscribers, and even to seek legal recourse if it came to that. (2) When the first threats came in, I forwarded them to his postmaster with a note explaining that I was still trying to resolve the matter cooperatively, but that I may need assistance if that failed. I also sent a copy of the list guidelines and explained how the person in question ahd habitually violated them. (3) When even toned messages asking this person to respect the list guidelines failed and the abusive beahvior escalated to a weak denial of service attack, I forwarded the evidence to the postmaster, who in turn shut down the guy's account without delay. Eventually, that senario was played out with two more ISP's before the guy went learned his lesson. (4) I configured the list to reject posts from non-subscribers and I made sure the individual in question did not subscribe. (5) I notified my own ISP of the trouble I was having with this person, just in case he tried to cause trouble with them. He did, but they were ready for him. Good luck, Todd Ourston -- Todd Ourston <2bits@wco.com> Marin County, California From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 9 01:43:21 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id BAA22853 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 9 May 1997 01:34:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from proxy3.ba.best.com (proxy3.ba.best.com [206.184.139.14]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id BAA22837 for ; Fri, 9 May 1997 01:34:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shellx.best.com (shellx.best.com [206.86.0.11]) by proxy3.ba.best.com (8.8.5/8.8.3) with ESMTP id BAA14768; Fri, 9 May 1997 01:33:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from cnorman@localhost) by shellx.best.com (8.8.5/8.8.3) id BAA05270; Fri, 9 May 1997 01:03:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 9 May 1997 01:03:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199705090803.BAA05270@shellx.best.com> From: Cyndi Norman To: whitread@ozemail.com.au CC: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, cnorman@shellx.best.com In-reply-to: <3371AC1F.E09@ozemail.com.au> (message from Graeme Read & Grant Whittingham on Thu, 08 May 1997 20:34:07 +1000) Subject: Re: Threats from an unsubscribed list member Reply-to: cnorman@best.com Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi Graeme, I'm sorry to hear you've experienced the nasty side of the net. There are kooks and perps and just plain horrid people out there...as there are anywhere. About two years ago I had the joy of an attack on me and my list. At the time, my list was controlled manually and I had no way to block out posts (now I have subscription software and I have it set so only subscribers can post but I have no way to block anyone from subscribing...I can only try to unsub them when I get the notification). I moved cross-country and ended up being homeless for a while and under tons of stress from that and other sources. I fell behind in maintaining the list which pissed lots of people off. Some took to badmouthing me on the list itself. A group of 3 people fuelled this way beyond the expected venting. Topics such as "Immune...the list from hell" were common. These 3 took to attacking me and my subscribers. They posted about me to USENET groups. One of them posted to the list how he didn't care if I was sleeping under a bridge, I needed to "do [my] job." This went on for months...long after I unsubscribed them all and caught up on list admin. The last straw was that same one who posted that I was going to hell for being a lesbian (my girlfriend had posted in my defence earlier...his response was to call her a witch and a few other things). I don't remember everything he said but it was a long post on the same key. Some people have the hobby of disrupting lists; there's even a USENET group for this. In some cases, the disrupters are responding to the content (my list, for example, discusses lawsuits against large corporations and government coverups of chemical use). In other cases, they just do this for kicks. And sometimes the disruptor is just an indivudual with a distorted sense of things. The good news in my case was that all these people were on AOL. I forwarded select messages to AOL and got their accounts yanked. That's the last I heard from any of them. For those of you who have seen an old post of mine about some of my subscribers who sent private mail to another subscriber to the point of making her suicidal and sending her to a mental hosptial...these are the same people and this is part of the reason I didn't mess around with "tolerating" them. I would save all this creeps personal letters to you as well as any posts that you consider inappropriate. Also save any letters you send to him. If you feel he has crossed the line, send them along to his postmaster, with a note of explaination. Some ISP's respond promptly and take matters like these seriously. Others will ignore you. Most are somewhere inbetween. I would make one reply to him; tell him to stop writing you. State it clearly, politely, and with no emotion. Add that if he continues to write you you will send the letters to his postmaster. If you have no luck with the postmaster at his ISP, do a traceroute on his address and send your letters to the ISP's upstream. You can also enlist the help of your sysops if needed. But save this for serious continuous personal threats or direct action he takes to disrupt your list. Good luck. I know it's awful to get mail like this, and, no, you dont get used to it. But most kooks like this one are mostly air and no substance. Cyndi -- _______________________________________________________________________________ "There's nothing wrong with me. Maybe there's Cyndi Norman something wrong with the universe." (ST:TNG) cnorman@best.com __________________________________________________ http://www.best.com/~cnorman From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 9 17:59:12 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id RAA17738 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:44:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id RAA17692 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:43:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dgs.dgsys.com (dgs.dgsys.com [204.97.64.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id JAA10840 for ; Fri, 9 May 1997 09:07:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [204.97.64.246] (hyperreal.dgsys.com) by dgs.dgsys.com (5.0/SMI-SVR4) id AA06963; Fri, 9 May 1997 12:06:46 -0400 Date: Fri, 9 May 1997 12:06:44 -0400 X-Sender: theseus@pop.dgsys.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: "Paul L. Moses" Subject: Re: Threats from an unsubscribed list member Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk +From: "Nathan J. Mehl" +Subject: Re: Threats from an unsubscribed list member + +In the immortal words of Graeme Read & Grant Whittingham: + +> More disturbingly he made a couple of very clear +> threats - that I had met my "Waterloo" in him and that he would do +> everything he could to oppose me, the list and have it shut down. +> You people have had much more experience in dealing with this kind of +> thing than me. What should I do about the situation? Should I be +> worried? Should I take any action? + +More than likely, you're deal with yet another of the +emotionally stunted sociopath crew that make administering any public +resource on the net such a royal pain in the ass occasionially. Let me second that thought. There are certain individuals out there who have "bad boundaries" and fail to understand that anything they can affect does not *belong* to them. I recall one individual in particular on my list who sent me detailed advice on how and whether or not to edit his post, and similar advice on how to handle a certain issue. When I said, Thanks but no thanks, please butt out, and deleted his letter, I got the old "You're a power-mad such and such, freedom of speech is being suppressed, blah blah blah...." This same individual also compiled an index to resources in my archives WITHOUT asking and again had to be told that he needed permission to do that. Again he trotted out freedom of speech, etc. If he had been a little more cooperative it would not have been a problem, but he was really obnoxious and insistent, so his attitude killed the index, basically. Of course I had to go "public" to another list with this before he would admit that he did NOT have authority to do the index without my permission. It was a big hassle and wasted a lot of my time that could have gone into making my list or website a better resource for everyone else. Worse, it makes you more apathetic and less enthusiastic about running your resource in the longer term. Paul --------- Cognition is an emotion. From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 9 18:05:26 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id RAA17647 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:43:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id RAA17607 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:43:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spot.cs.utk.edu (SPOT.CS.UTK.EDU [128.169.92.189]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id IAA08624 for ; Fri, 9 May 1997 08:53:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cs.utk.edu by spot.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.11c-UTK) id LAA23671; Fri, 9 May 1997 11:53:14 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199705091553.LAA23671@spot.cs.utk.edu> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0gamma 1/27/96 X-URI: http://www.cs.utk.edu/~moore/ From: Keith Moore To: KnowlesB@aol.net cc: LSTOWN-L@peach.ease.lsoft.com, LSTSRV-L@peach.ease.lsoft.com, Valdis Kletnieks , Michael Ramundo , Jeff Kell , Pete Weiss , list-managers@greatcircle.com, Eric Thomas , moore@cs.utk.edu Subject: Re: rejected mail - RFC822 conflict ??? In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 07 May 1997 13:51:36 EDT." <199705071751.NAA28668@chrome.office.aol.com> X-SUBJECT-MSG-FROM: Brad Knowles Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 09 May 1997 11:53:13 -0400 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk It is a well-established principle that an SMTP server may refuse to accept mail for any operational or technical reason that makes sense to the site providing the server. Sure, you can do this. But when an AOL.COM SMTP server which is listed in the DNS as a mail exchanger for one of AOL's domains, refuses to accept a reasonable-sized message with a perfectly valid return address that is destined for a valid recipient at that domain... then AOL is not providing the level of mail service that its customers have every right to expect. Source-routed addresses are not forbidden. They're archaic, perhaps obsolete. But they're still valid, and some sites still generate them. And in my experience, source-routed addresses aren't very good indicators of spam. A lot of spam uses such addresses, but so does a lot of legitimate mail. In my experience, invalid return addresses (either invalid syntax or a nonexistent domain, in either the From header or envelope) are a FAR better indication of spam. My lists forward any message lacking a valid return address to the list maintainer. This catches a great deal of spam, and very few legitimate messages. IMHO, you have far better grounds for rejecting a message on the grounds that its return address is invalid -- especially if the envelope return address is invalid -- than for rejecting valid source-routed addresses. > Our general approach is one whereby if we can't determine that > we could bounce a message if we had to (i.e., a message comes in > for a nonexistant AOL user, or for one whose mailbox is full), then > we won't accept that message. That's a reasonable criterion. But the use of a source route doesn't mean that you can't bounce it. Especially given that 1123 clearly allows you to strip the route portion. If stripping the route from the return-path yields an invalid address, *then* it's reasonable to refuse to accept the message. Keith From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 9 18:12:25 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id RAA17295 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:40:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id RAA17287 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:40:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.oulu.fi (lists.oulu.fi [130.231.241.85]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id IAA11864 for ; Thu, 8 May 1997 08:35:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (mhotti@localhost) by lists.oulu.fi (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id SAA27780; Thu, 8 May 1997 18:35:33 +0300 Date: Thu, 8 May 1997 18:35:33 +0300 (EET DST) From: Marko Hotti X-Sender: mhotti@majordomo.oulu.fi To: Graeme Read & Grant Whittingham cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Threats from an unsubscribed list member In-Reply-To: <3371AC1F.E09@ozemail.com.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Thu, 8 May 1997, Graeme Read & Grant Whittingham wrote: > After a warning to him that was ignored and two months worth of > sarcastic comments about me posted to the list, not to mention a number > of complaints from normally quiet subscribers, I have been forced, > reluctantly, to unsubscribe him. The first person I've unsubscribed for > such a reason. I wrote a letter to my list explaining why I had done it > and, to my surprise, I have received about 12 replies thanking me and > telling me not to worry about it. My personal policy in cases like this is to send a warning to the person along with the mailing list netiquette. Do you have a netiquette or some kind of rules of posting in your mailing lists? I have found it necessary to have some kind of regulations and basic rules - even though we respect the freedom of speach. In any cases - I will NEVER wait for TWO MONTHS. If the person keeps behaving badly and does not have respect for you as the list administrator, then he will have to find another list to mess around. > is something definitely wrong with him. It was a tirade of personal > abuse accusing me of being a dictator amongst other things I'd rather > not go into here. More disturbingly he made a couple of very clear > threats - that I had met my "Waterloo" in him and that he would do > everything he could to oppose me, the list and have it shut down. Don't get intimidated by this person. Internet is full of all kinds of freaks and weird people - most of them are usually just being childish and you should get yourself above him. > thing than me. What should I do about the situation? Should I be > worried? Should I take any action? Maybe a letter to his Internet Service Provider could be a good idea. If this guy is breaking the ISP policy, they could perhaps close his account - provided that you have good evidence against him. > I admit that it has shaken me up somewhat. Your advice would be > appreciated. I have been administrating 'lists.oulu.fi' for four years now and we are running about 200 mailing lists with both Finnish and international subscribers. I don't have the time to argue with the people if they don't know how to behave themselves. Just set strict rules on your lists and make sure every new subscriber receives some kind of netiquette. If they break it, you are entitled to do whatever you feel fit. /Marko Marko Hotti System Administrator / Medical Student / Vocalist & Pianist University of Oulu Computer Services Center -- Phones: +358 40 552 8415 (mobile) +358 8 530 4268 (home) +358 8 312 7172 (otho) SnailMail: Tervontie 4 C 11, FIN-90230 OULU, Finland Public PGP encryption key available on request --> mhotti@lists.oulu.fi www.lists.oulu.fi (list services home page) www.cc.oulu.fi/~mhotti (personal) From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 9 18:13:49 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id RAA16795 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:35:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id RAA16782 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:35:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from chrome.office.aol.com (chrome.office.aol.com [152.163.67.244]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id OAA03009 for ; Wed, 7 May 1997 14:49:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (brad@localhost) by chrome.office.aol.com (8.8.6.Alpha2/8.8.5/AOL-0.0.7) with ESMTP id RAA01125; Wed, 7 May 1997 17:51:37 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199705072151.RAA01125@chrome.office.aol.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0gamma 1/27/96 Reply-To: KnowlesB@aol.net Organization: America Online, Inc. X-Telefacsimile: (703) 453-4013 X-PGP-Fingerprint: DA 2A 59 B1 A8 BD 4C B2 B0 41 CE 6E BD C3 15 54 X-Face: "HJz{@e(gkOmJfq8b$n:zW8Kk4*`Sz1?<#`g=5p>Wuu7DkDV`m-*p[Yb=?;w(F:L'DHA{mO]=iKKKdH)r%I7K;dvYQ{3Y6"3MW@Y*U_6?>lOw;GIva\?7579Ii|/$t"\+lE cc: LSTOWN-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM, LSTSRV-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM, Valdis Kletnieks , Michael Ramundo , Jeff Kell , Pete Weiss , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: rejected mail - RFC822 conflict ??? In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 07 May 1997 22:18:52 +0200." <199705072109.RAA01301@postman.ops.aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 17:51:37 -0400 From: Brad Knowles Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Your message dated: Wed, 07 May 1997 22:18:52 +0200 > Well Brad, just don't get all surprised the next time the usual AOL > bashing gang flames you :-) They are usually wrong, but this time they > will be right. Let them flame away. It has been my experience that those who flame AOL have never had to deal with a system anywhere *near* 1/10th the size of what we have, where a difference in scale typically results in a difference in kind. If they think they can do any better (yourself included), let them come here and prove it. > Come to think about it, you can actually prove the opposite. If > it is possible to severely impact AOL by sending a spam message with MAIL > FROM:<@xxx:yyy> that AOL would internally convert to MAIL FROM:, > then obviously it is possible to severely impact AOL by sending the same > spam message but with MAIL FROM:, which AOL does accept. Yes? Assuming that by "yyy" you mean a proper address with both a domain part and a local part, then no. We also refuse to accept mail from any address where the domain part does not resolve in the DNS (i.e., which we could presumably send a bounce back to, if need be). If by "yyy" you mean an address that does not have both a local part and a domain part, then no -- we refuse to accept mail from any address where the domain part does not resolve in the DNS. > Well, if the one sender, 2-3 legitimate recipient messages in question > threaten the very existence of your property, I think you need to upgrade > to less vulnerable property :-) The 2-3 legitimate messages per day you reference do not themselves pose the problem. The illegitimate messages do, and the systems that propagate the *requirement* that we must pay to accept any and all messages, even if they threaten the very existance of our system, likewise pose a problem. > This discussion is clearly not going anywhere and unless it gets > more technical quickly I suggest we all go home and forget about it. Agreed. The response I've gotten from AOL users so far has been exceedingly positive, and I regret that we (driven both by myself *and* management, it's not just been a crusade of a single person) have had to take this action to protect our system, but I believe that the majority of AOL members will appreciate this fact when they are faced with the choice of either having a system at all, or having one that refuses to accept certain types of messages. I believe that you'll find beleaguered SysAdmins the world over that will feel the same way we do, and we will not be the minority, but instead will be leading the majority down the proper path. -- Brad Knowles MIME/PGP: KnowlesB@aol.net Senior Unix Administrator From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 9 18:19:36 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id RAA16856 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:36:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id RAA16838 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:36:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (mycroft.greatcircle.com [198.102.244.35]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id QAA02915 for ; Wed, 7 May 1997 16:57:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.8.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-970426) id QAA00736; Wed, 7 May 1997 16:15:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199705072315.QAA00736@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <1.C2CBDE8D@SEGATE.SUNET.SE>; Thu, 8 May 1997 0:39:33 +0100 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE by SEARN.SUNET.SE (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with BSMTP id 2877; Thu, 08 May 97 00:40:09 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin ERIC@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2c/1.8c) with RFC822 id 6918; Thu, 8 May 1997 00:40:09 +0200 Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 23:54:11 +0200 From: Eric Thomas Subject: Re: rejected mail - RFC822 conflict ??? To: KnowlesB@aol.net, Brad Knowles cc: LSTOWN-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM, LSTSRV-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM, Valdis Kletnieks , Michael Ramundo , Jeff Kell , Pete Weiss , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Message of Wed, 07 May 1997 17:51:37 -0400 from Brad Knowles Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Wed, 07 May 1997 17:51:37 -0400 Brad Knowles said: > Let them flame away. It has been my experience that those who flame >AOL have never had to deal with a system anywhere *near* 1/10th the size >of what we have, where a difference in scale typically results in a >difference in kind. *sigh* All right. How much SMTP mail did AOL deliver yesterday? L-Soft made 4,143,362 deliveries yesterday (below average). I imagine that AOL delivered well over 41,433,620 SMTP messages in that time frame, or you would not have applied this remark to me. > If they think they can do any better (yourself included), let them >come here and prove it. As a matter of fact, yes, I do think I could do better than your sendmail-based setup! You would actually keep your current sendmail setup but route all your outgoing mail through a redundant LSMTP configuration (ideally a VMS cluster with shared redundant storage and automatic failover, so that you can blow up any one of the box and continue uninterrupted). Likewise, these servers could collect your incoming mail and route it to your unix systems at a pace which you would be able to control. This would allow you to operate your sendmail systems in the most efficient manner, with little or no outbound queue, a controlled number of concurrent processes, etc. So, you would be able to keep development and custom code on unix where you want it, while dramatically improving your performance and capacity. Was this a honest invitation or just a figure of speech? If you are serious, please send us your technical requirements and we will take it on from there. > The response I've gotten from AOL users so far has been exceedingly >positive, Let me get this straight. You have observed that a lot of spammers used source routes in the MAIL FROM: field. You then started rejecting this mail and your users have been very happy. I don't doubt this. What is going to happen though is that the spammers will get a clue, if not tomorrow then next week or next month, and they will stop sending mail with source routed MAIL FROM:, since it does not get there, and instead use a % hack, the hostname of some random cisco somewhere in the net (that would work wonders on your sendmail queues!), or why bother, just MAIL FROM:<>. Your users will get the spam again and you will be back to the drawing board. So, this is a temporary hack that will buy you some amount of temporary relief until the spammers get smarter. Why didn't you say so from the beginning? I still don't agree with the approach, but this at least makes some measure of sense. Definitely more than just stating that source routes are intrinsically evil and need to be exterminated. > I believe that you'll find beleaguered SysAdmins the world over that >will feel the same way we do, I am not disputing your right to refuse to process illegitimate messages. We do this as well, and frankly I don't know where you got the notion that I do not have to deal with spammers on a daily basis and have no idea how mean they can be and so on. I am only disputing the wisdom of rejecting perfectly legitimate messages (which have 2-3 recipients and are thus clearly not spam) on the basis that the MAIL FROM: field looks like what the current version of a popular spam program generates, especially since there will be a new version of the spam program soon to correct this "problem". Eric From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 9 18:19:58 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id RAA17223 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:40:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id RAA17215 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:40:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sacusr.mp.usbr.gov (sacusr.mp.usbr.gov [140.214.12.2]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id EAA25727 for ; Thu, 8 May 1997 04:30:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by sacto.mp.usbr.gov (MX B5.0) id 1; Thu, 8 May 1997 04:30:08 PDT Date: Thu, 8 May 1997 04:30:04 PDT From: "Henry W. Miller" To: whitread@ozemail.com.au CC: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009B3EF0.F7A2FE78.1@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: RE: Threats from an unsubscribed list member Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > From: MX%"whitread@ozemail.com.au" 8-MAY-1997 03:51:11.01 > Subj: Threats from an unsubscribed list member Graeme, > Hi fellow list managers, > > I've been on this list for several months and appreciated the policy and > technical tips that you have all contributed. Sometimes the software > talk is a little over my head but it's only by reading this stuff that > it will start to make sense and sink in. > > I run a list for approximately 200 people. There hasn't been any of the > real drama mentioned by some of you as happening on your lists (the > death threat, legal action situations come to mind). Well, until now. > > About two months ago I subscribed someone to the list who began causing > a lot of trouble by sending multiple posts day after day, contributing > nothing to the discussion and often just seeming to indulge in self > promotion. He immediately had a large chunk of the list subscribers > offside and the complaints started rolling in. > Welcome to the world of list management. > As I started the list with a policy of open discussion and "sensible > freedom of speech" I didn't take any action, hoping he would get sick of > it and calm down. Disturbingly, he also seemed to gain a small but > vocal support group on the list. I was dealing with an incensed "silent > majority" whilst he claimed the moral high ground and pointed to his > supporters as validating anything he choose to send to the list. > That's surprising, although it's difficult to say why without more context. > After a warning to him that was ignored and two months worth of > sarcastic comments about me posted to the list, not to mention a number > of complaints from normally quiet subscribers, I have been forced, > reluctantly, to unsubscribe him. The first person I've unsubscribed for > such a reason. I wrote a letter to my list explaining why I had done it > and, to my surprise, I have received about 12 replies thanking me and > telling me not to worry about it. > I've been through a similar situation. The person in question made running the list hell for me. People were unsubscribing faster than I could keep up. And I received numerous complaints. When I yanked him, only one person, other than the person I removed cried "censorship". Another list member had a sidebar with the person crying censorship, and explained the full history of the situation, and that person calmed down. Prior to actually pulling this person from the list, we spoke with his ISP about that person's attitude, language and possible threatening language against a couple other members of the list. The ISP response was: "Well, why don't you moderate your list?". He refused to do anything. > I have had reason to doubt his emotional stability at times during the > last two months but a post I received tonight has confirmed that there > is something definitely wrong with him. It was a tirade of personal > abuse accusing me of being a dictator amongst other things I'd rather > not go into here. More disturbingly he made a couple of very clear > threats - that I had met my "Waterloo" in him and that he would do > everything he could to oppose me, the list and have it shut down. > This person made similar threats against me, saying that he could bring the list down anytime he wanted to. Well, that was 18 months ago, and the list is still running... > You people have had much more experience in dealing with this kind of > thing than me. What should I do about the situation? Should I be > worried? Should I take any action? > Most of these people are all talk, no action. But, in the off chance that you are dealing with a dangerous person, I'd first document EVERYTHING - all offensive messages, any warnings that you sent him, threats that he has made, etc. Send them first to his ISP. I'd also print copies of everything and give them to your local police, and let them handle it from there. But, I would also not let him goad you via email into replying to him. Just file his mail away. > I admit that it has shaken me up somewhat. Your advice would be > appreciated. > Good luck - he'll hopefully calm down and decide that your list is not worth the effort. I'm not making a judgement about your list, since I know nothing about it. Hopefully he'll look for a soapbox elsewhere. > Graeme Read > Sydney, Australia > > whitread@ozemail.com.au -HWM From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 9 18:26:29 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id RAA16923 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:37:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id RAA16915 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:37:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE (segate.sunet.se [192.36.125.6]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id RAA08963 for ; Wed, 7 May 1997 17:53:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199705080053.RAA08963@honor.greatcircle.com> Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <15.80B0B335@SEGATE.SUNET.SE>; Thu, 8 May 1997 2:53:42 +0100 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE by SEARN.SUNET.SE (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with BSMTP id 3394; Thu, 08 May 97 02:54:19 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin ERIC@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2c/1.8c) with RFC822 id 8007; Thu, 8 May 1997 02:54:19 +0200 Date: Thu, 8 May 1997 01:16:19 +0200 From: Eric Thomas Subject: Re: rejected mail - RFC822 conflict ??? To: KnowlesB@aol.net, Brad Knowles cc: LSTOWN-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM, LSTSRV-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM, Valdis Kletnieks , Michael Ramundo , Jeff Kell , Pete Weiss , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Message of Wed, 07 May 1997 19:12:52 -0400 from Brad Knowles Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Wed, 07 May 1997 19:12:52 -0400 Brad Knowles said: > I've discovered over the years that it's not recipient deliveries >that are important, since large numbers of deliveries typically get sent >to the same MXes (so what you would need to count instead would be >number of separate envelopes delivered). Well, I've discovered over the years that sendmail people invariably think in terms of the things that limit sendmail's performance. Other systems have other strengths and weaknesses, and different limitations. > We received over five million messages yesterday (and rejected >another seven million delivery attempts), to a total of almost 23 >million recipients. So, we do have more than 1/10th of your volume. >The Internet side is typically about half the total volume of the AOL >mail system as a whole. Internal mail from AOL user 1 to AOL user 2 doesn't go through SMTP and I don't see how it is relevant to this discussion, other than conveniently providing the 23M of deliveries you were missing :-) > Now, how many million messages did you receive yesterday? Receive, not that many. There are the bounces of course, but like any other large mailing list shop, we receive a lot less than we send. I imagine AOL is the opposite and receives a lot more than it sends. Anyway, I think what you really want to know is the number of SMTP transactions that we've made, regardless of the recipient count, right? I can get exact numbers if necessary, but it's usually about half the recipient count (lots of small to mid-size lists with mostly one subscriber per host), so about 2 million and change, vs your 5 million SMTP transactions. Ironically, you had a much more impressive workload when we were talking recipients :-) >> As a matter of fact, yes, I do think I could do better than your >> sendmail-based setup! > > Then put your money where your mouth is. Give up your day job and >come over here to learn how the big boys play the game. I have no intention of either giving up my day job, moving to the US or joining AOL, nor do I see any reason why this would be necessary in order to accomplish the stated goals. Nevertheless, I was making a serious business proposal. I am not in the habit of saying "I can do this!" and then explaining that I was really just kidding to try and impress people, and could everyone please forgive me. I was not kidding at all and while you obviously think that no one outside of AOL can possibly understand the challenges that AOL is facing, I have heard that tune before and there is nothing I like more than a technical challenge, so please do send me your technical requirements and we will follow up on them. And please don't tell me that this is a waste of time because I can't begin to imagine how incredibly momentous your requirements are because I'm just a little boy lost in the woods, this is simply not going to convince me. In 1987 we had a mainframe which very nearly had a terabyte of data, and that was a LOT of data back then. Yes, this and other factors did create "in kind" problems as you said, but we sat down and worked on them until they were solved. You just didn't get responsibilities in the mainframe world unless you could sit down and solve "big" problems without letting the numbers impress you out of your wits. It is by applying "big" problem skills to more affordable hardware (and not saying "It can't be done! It's way too much traffic!") that products like LSMTP are developed. I see that Matt Korn is still your VP of Operations, so it looks like I may be preaching to the choir :-) Anyway, just take a piece of desktop, write down all the numbers, however big, add all your special requirements, and let us work on them. Maybe we won't be able to meet your requirements right now, but software is made to be improved. Eric From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 9 18:26:34 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id RAA16756 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:35:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id RAA16744 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:35:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE (segate.sunet.se [192.36.125.6]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id OAA00341 for ; Wed, 7 May 1997 14:06:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199705072106.OAA00341@honor.greatcircle.com> Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <1.26897F69@SEGATE.SUNET.SE>; Wed, 7 May 1997 23:09:17 +0100 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE by SEARN.SUNET.SE (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with BSMTP id 2171; Wed, 07 May 97 23:09:53 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin ERIC@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2c/1.8c) with RFC822 id 5507; Wed, 7 May 1997 23:09:53 +0200 Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 22:18:52 +0200 From: Eric Thomas Subject: Re: rejected mail - RFC822 conflict ??? To: KnowlesB@aol.net, Brad Knowles cc: LSTOWN-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM, LSTSRV-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM, Valdis Kletnieks , Michael Ramundo , Jeff Kell , Pete Weiss , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Message of Wed, 07 May 1997 16:14:03 -0400 from Brad Knowles Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Wed, 07 May 1997 16:14:03 -0400 Brad Knowles said: >> All you have to do then is ignore the source route, which is allowed >> by RFC1123. I cannot think of any reason why ignoring the source route >> would not address your concerns. > > See my previous response. I don't feel I have anything more to say >on that subject than I've already said. I must be dumb then, because I don't see anything in your previous message which explains why you can't just ignore the source route per RFC1123. What I did read your previous message is that honouring the source route creates a problem for you because spammers have used it to request that bounces be sent through a system whose SMTP port is always down, which I imagine would create quite a big queue for you. Obviously if you ignore the source route this no longer happens. Equally obviously, spammers can use a MAIL FROM: address pointing to a cisco but without a source route, or they can use the percent-hack. This looks like a non-solution with the side effect of discarding legitimate mail. Where I come from, this is called a Bad Thing. > Source routes in the domain portion are inherently evil beyond >reproach, and there's nothing you can do to convince me that they should >not be rejected out of hand. Any system that actively propagates this >kind of behaviour is likewise inherently evil. Any system that passively >allows this kind of behaviour needs to be fixed. Well Brad, just don't get all surprised the next time the usual AOL bashing gang flames you :-) They are usually wrong, but this time they will be right. > However, this is a particular behaviour that has been deprecated for >at least six years (RFC 1123, section 5.2.6, as clearly pointed out by >Valdis), and it's time that it went completely away. Fine, but the part I don't really understand here is why AOL's customers should suffer because of Brad Knowles' personal crusade against source routes. Until I hear a TECHNICAL explanation for why AOL cannot comply with RFC1123 and throw away the source route part, I will remain of the technical opinion that AOL customers have nothing to gain and everything to lose from this decision. I am perfectly willing to admit that I was wrong if I hear a compelling technical argument, but right now all I've heard is that it would threaten AOL's operations for reasons that have already been stated, except I just can't seem to find or understand these reasons. Come to think about it, you can actually prove the opposite. If it is possible to severely impact AOL by sending a spam message with MAIL FROM:<@xxx:yyy> that AOL would internally convert to MAIL FROM:, then obviously it is possible to severely impact AOL by sending the same spam message but with MAIL FROM:, which AOL does accept. Yes? > Whatever the L-Soft system is that can potentially generate >source-routed envelope addresses, I would like to make sure that current >and future versions have that feature default to "off" (which appears to >already be the case, given your other comments). Yes, this has been the case for years. I doubt more than a handful of sites still have the old settings. > There is nothing in any law that requires me (or my company) to pay >to accept messages that are in a format (and/or quantity) such that they >threaten the very existance of my property (or the property of my >company). Well, if the one sender, 2-3 legitimate recipient messages in question threaten the very existence of your property, I think you need to upgrade to less vulnerable property :-) Anyway, sure, I'm happy to concede that you have the legal right to throw away any and all mail addressed to AOL, just as Compuserve's marketing department has the legal right to organize a party to rejoice over the opportunities that you have opened for them today. This discussion is clearly not going anywhere and unless it gets more technical quickly I suggest we all go home and forget about it. Eric From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 9 18:28:37 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id SAA20481 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 9 May 1997 18:18:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ginger.vnet.net (ginger.vnet.net [166.82.1.69]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id SAA20474 for ; Fri, 9 May 1997 18:18:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from katie.vnet.net (murr@katie.vnet.net [166.82.1.7]) by ginger.vnet.net (8.8.5/8.8.2) with ESMTP id VAA19626 for ; Fri, 9 May 1997 21:18:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA23485 for ; Fri, 9 May 1997 21:18:50 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: katie.vnet.net: murr owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 9 May 1997 21:18:50 -0400 (EDT) From: murr rhame To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Threats from an unsubscribed list member In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Fri, 9 May 1997, Paul L. Moses wrote: > ... When I said, Thanks but no thanks, please butt out, and deleted his > letter, I got the old "You're a power-mad such and such, freedom of > speech is being suppressed, blah blah blah...." I agree that a listowner has essentially unlimited power with regard to what traffic is acceptable on their list. You provide the resources. You decide how those resources will be used. Freedom of speech has never included unrestricted access to any forum you choose. > This same individual also compiled an index to resources in my archives > WITHOUT asking and again had to be told that he needed permission to do > that... I don't understand the conflict here. Would you please add some details? I don't see how someone compiling an "unauthorized" index of your archives could be a problem. - murr - From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 9 18:33:10 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id RAA16661 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:32:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id RAA16638 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:32:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE (segate.sunet.se [192.36.125.6]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id MAA17820 for ; Wed, 7 May 1997 12:30:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199705071930.MAA17820@honor.greatcircle.com> Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <11.AAC94F6F@SEGATE.SUNET.SE>; Wed, 7 May 1997 21:32:46 +0100 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE by SEARN.SUNET.SE (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with BSMTP id 1391; Wed, 07 May 97 21:33:22 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin ERIC@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2c/1.8c) with RFC822 id 3901; Wed, 7 May 1997 21:33:22 +0200 Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 19:54:40 +0200 From: Eric Thomas Subject: Re: rejected mail - RFC822 conflict ??? To: LSTOWN-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM, LSTSRV-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM, KnowlesB@aol.net, Brad Knowles cc: Valdis Kletnieks , Michael Ramundo , Jeff Kell , Pete Weiss , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Message of Wed, 07 May 1997 13:51:36 -0400 from Brad Knowles Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Wed, 07 May 1997 13:51:36 -0400 Brad Knowles said: > Specifically, source-routed mail has historically been the source of >no end of problems, and frequently abused by less savoury types in >attempts to ensure that they don't have to deal with their bounces, >etc..., we consider this an operational issue and will refuse to accept >mail with source-routed envelope addresses. All you have to do then is ignore the source route, which is allowed by RFC1123. I cannot think of any reason why ignoring the source route would not address your concerns. Incidentally, if a spammer doesn't want to deal with bounces, there is MAIL FROM:<>... Or did AOL also start rejecting such messages? This would make AOL useless for managing a mailing list, among other things. > At some point in time, the RFC 1123 "Robustness Principle" (section >1.1.2) continues the propagation of more and more bad systems, I'm sorry, but the "bad system" here is AOL's, which not only fails to observe a very reasonable RFC1123 rule (ignore the source route if you don't want to support it, we're talking about an entire line of code here), but quotes a completely irrelevant standard (RFC822) and verse to justify a RFC821-level behaviour which takes place before the RFC822 header is even transferred to AOL's system. I find it somewhat offensive that AOL then refers to the sending systems as "bad systems" that we will never be able to get rid of. These systems are doing something which used to be a mandatory procedure in order to comply with Internet standards, and which is totally harmless as you are allowed to ignore source routes completely if you do not want to implement or honour them. > Essentially as much has been observed by various Internet mail >experts, many of whom are working on drafting the upcoming standards. Brad, maybe I'm not reading this in the light in which it was meant, but there are probably more Internet mail experts among the people you are sending this message to than in the group you mentioned, and as you know technical people tend to be independent thinkers. This isn't to say that the people on the DRUMS group aren't mail experts, but DRUMS doesn't have a monopoly on mail experts, and I'm sure you realize that many people signed off after getting tired of receiving 100-150 DRUMS messages a day with Dan Bernstein flame wars and other kindergarten arguments. It also doesn't make much sense to ask people to submit to the wisdom of a task force working on new Internet drafts which may or may not become Internet standards in a couple years, let alone industry standards, when at the same time you refuse to submit to the wisdom of existing Internet standards with their existing user base. Again I am sorry if I took this in the wrong light, but this is just the impression that I got from your message, whether it was meant or not. > I'd like to see this default changed in upcoming releases of >ListServ, so that in the future, email with source-routed envelope >addresses will not be generated unless you explicitly configure it to do >so. LISTSERV does not generate source routes, nor has it ever done that. Even back in 1986, LISTSERV had a strong no-source-routes stance. However, if presented with a source route it does ignore it gracefully, as you would expect. The source routes come from LMail, a MTA for VM (also from L-Soft) which can be configured to implement the original RFC821 reverse path behaviour where you insert source routes in the MAIL FROM: address (at no point is a source route added to the RFC822 header). Nowadays the default setting is not to generate source routes, but this has not always been the case and some sites may still have that option enabled in their configuration file, or may have enabled it for their own reasons. They should probably change it (change 'SOURCE_ROUTES = 1' to 'SOURCE_ROUTES = 0' in LOCAL SYSVARS), but AOL should definitely not reject MAIL FROM:<@XYZ.EDU:JOE@XYZ.EDU> when it does accept MAIL FROM:. Even setting aside the fact that the standards require AOL to accept this syntax, it just does not make any technical sense to reject it, and it leads to the loss of legitimate mail for AOL's customers. Eric From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 9 18:33:40 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id RAA16904 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:36:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id RAA16894 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:36:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (mycroft.greatcircle.com [198.102.244.35]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id QAA02948 for ; Wed, 7 May 1997 16:58:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from chrome.office.aol.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.8.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-970426) id QAA00696; Wed, 7 May 1997 16:14:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (brad@localhost) by chrome.office.aol.com (8.8.6.Beta1/8.8.5/AOL-0.0.7) with ESMTP id TAA01974; Wed, 7 May 1997 19:12:53 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199705072312.TAA01974@chrome.office.aol.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0gamma 1/27/96 Reply-To: KnowlesB@aol.net Organization: America Online, Inc. X-Telefacsimile: (703) 453-4013 X-PGP-Fingerprint: DA 2A 59 B1 A8 BD 4C B2 B0 41 CE 6E BD C3 15 54 X-Face: "HJz{@e(gkOmJfq8b$n:zW8Kk4*`Sz1?<#`g=5p>Wuu7DkDV`m-*p[Yb=?;w(F:L'DHA{mO]=iKKKdH)r%I7K;dvYQ{3Y6"3MW@Y*U_6?>lOw;GIva\?7579Ii|/$t"\+lE cc: LSTOWN-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM, LSTSRV-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM, Valdis Kletnieks , Michael Ramundo , Jeff Kell , Pete Weiss , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: rejected mail - RFC822 conflict ??? In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 07 May 1997 23:54:11 +0200." <199705072239.SAA08451@postman.ops.aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 19:12:52 -0400 From: Brad Knowles Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Your message dated: Wed, 07 May 1997 23:54:11 +0200 > *sigh* All right. How much SMTP mail did AOL deliver yesterday? L-Soft > made 4,143,362 deliveries yesterday (below average). I imagine that AOL > delivered well over 41,433,620 SMTP messages in that time frame, or you > would not have applied this remark to me. I've discovered over the years that it's not recipient deliveries that are important, since large numbers of deliveries typically get sent to the same MXes (so what you would need to count instead would be number of separate envelopes delivered). Instead, what separates the wheat from the chaff is the total number of messages *received*, or for which delivery attempts were made. We received over five million messages yesterday (and rejected another seven million delivery attempts), to a total of almost 23 million recipients. The Internet side is typically about half the total volume of the AOL mail system as a whole. If you want to count individual recipients, then guess what -- that's about 45 million, which is even slightly higher than the number you'd quoted. Now, how many million messages did you receive yesterday? > As a matter of fact, yes, I do think I could do better than your > sendmail-based setup! Then put your money where your mouth is. Give up your day job and come over here to learn how the big boys play the game. Until you think in terms like terabyte and petabyte the way everyone else talks about kilobytes and megabytes, you won't be thinking on the right kind of scale as to where we are today, much less where we have to plan to be tomorrow. I know that sounds crass, and in a way it's supposed to. However, it's been my experience that *no* one has been prepared for the scale of the operation we run here, the first day they walk in the door (heck, even three to six months later). Until you can think in the right scale, and invent solutions out of wholecloth for the unique types of problems that presents, there are just some things you can't talk intelligently about. > What is > going to happen though is that the spammers will get a clue, if not > tomorrow then next week or next month, and they will stop sending mail > with source routed MAIL FROM:, since it does not get there, and instead > use a % hack, the hostname of some random cisco somewhere in the net > (that would work wonders on your sendmail queues!), or why bother, just > MAIL FROM:<>. If we see an excessive number of messages that threaten the AOL mail system using the "% hack", then we'll turn that off too. I'd really hate to have to do it (since I've used that myself to help debug mail problems in the past), but we'll do what we have to do. As for null envelope senders, that actually doesn't do much to threaten the AOL mail system, since we'd never attempt to generate a bounce in that case anyway. > I still don't agree with the approach, but > this at least makes some measure of sense. Definitely more than just > stating that source routes are intrinsically evil and need to be > exterminated. You obviously don't understand. This is not a discussion about how things should be done, it's a simple statement of fact about how the AOL mail system works. Period. If you want to debate the technical issues with me in private, I'll be willing to discuss them so long as there appears to be a valid reason for continuing to do so. > We do this as well, and frankly I don't know where you got the notion > that I do not have to deal with spammers on a daily basis and have no > idea how mean they can be and so on. I know quite well that you have to deal with junkmailers on a daily basis, and from what I've seen, you've done a pretty good job. However, no other site on the *planet* has to deal with them on the scale that we do. This is a case where a difference in size has created a difference in kind. > I am only disputing the wisdom of > rejecting perfectly legitimate messages (which have 2-3 recipients and > are thus clearly not spam) on the basis that the MAIL FROM: field looks > like what the current version of a popular spam program generates, > especially since there will be a new version of the spam program soon to > correct this "problem". Unfortunately, we are required by law to take whatever technical means are possible to prevent "abuse" of our systems, and only when all possible avenues of technical methods are exhausted, will the courts (or lawmakers) then listen to our complaints. Such is the legal system we have to live with. -- Brad Knowles MIME/PGP: KnowlesB@aol.net Senior Unix Administrator From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 9 18:33:46 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id RAA17352 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:41:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id RAA17342 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:41:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from colossus.arl.mil (colossus.arl.mil [131.218.204.98]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id NAA07026 for ; Thu, 8 May 1997 13:04:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [131.218.204.98] by colossus.arl.mil with ESMTP (Eudora Internet Mail Server 1.1.2); Thu, 8 May 1997 16:09:26 +0000 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199705060646.BAA04282@bonkers.taronga.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Organization: Little to None X-Mailer: Eudora 3.0 for Cray Y-MP To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Vince Sabio Subject: Re: The "Duh!" Awards Date: Thu, 8 May 1997 16:09:26 +0000 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk ** Sometime around 01:46 -0500 5/6/97, Stephanie da Silva said: >CL: Please unsubscribe me from your mailing list. > >Me: Before I can do this, you'll need to tell me the name of the list. > >CL: I don't know.... That's a tough act to follow. I've got a *few* favorites, but this one was actually starting to get me annoyed: CL: I'm trying to unsubscribe from your mailing list, but your instructions do not work. Me: Huh. They seem to be working for most everyone else who has unsubscribed recently. What seems to be thy problem? CL: It says there's no such list. Me: You are probably typing something wrong. Could you please send me the EXACT command that you are sending to the server? (Since this is a PG-13 list, I'll delete all expletives from the rest of her correspondence; they really add nothing, anyway.) CL: I KNOW HOW TO USE A LISTSERVE! (sic) Just take me off your list! It's not my fault that your instructions are wrong! Me: The instructions seem to be working just fine for everyone else; plus, it's not a ListServ, it's a ListProc. Now, please send me the EXACT command that you are sending to the server. CL: I don't have to put up with being belittled by you!! WHY CAN'T YOU JUST TAKE ME OFF THE LIST? Me: Several reasons: (1) I'm not your mommy, (2) since you are writing to me from [name of college], I assume that you are a big girl now, and are old enough to be able to learn how to do this correctly, (3) you apparently got yourself ON TO the list by yourself, you theoretically should be able to get yourself OFF the list in much the same manner, (4) in the unlikely event that there really IS a problem with the server, I probably should know about it, and (5) if I give you a fish, I feed you for a day (insert rest of quote). Now, just ***send me the command that you are sending to the server*** or you will simply have to figure it all out on your own. I'm trying to help you; work with me here, okay? [at this point, we pause to note that the command, as included in the Welcome message in TWO places, and in the trailer of every list mailing, is simply "unsubscribe humornet".] CL: I'M SENDING EXACTLY WHAT YOU PUT IN THE INSTRUCTIONS, but it isn't working. So just take me off your list! Me: Look, I'm only going to ask this ONE more time: Send me the exact command that you are sending to the server. No rants. No complaints. Just send me the command. Is that too much to ask? CL: unsubscribe humornet, AND DON'T EVER WRITE BACK TO ME AGAIN! Me: Okay, here's your problem: You placed a comma after the word "humornet"; you'll note from the instructions that there is no comma there. Moreover, if you read the instructions REEEEALLY carefully, you also note that you are not supposed to include your name in an unsubscribe request -- though the server *usually* won't care if you do. So, the command should look like this: unsubscribe humornet That's it. Good luck. May the force be with you. And thank you for being with us. unsubscribe humournet Me: I'm sorry, but unless you BCCed that request to the server, you sent it to the wrong place. You were apparently sending it to the right address earlier; why did you change addresses? Moreover, why did you change the spelling of the list name? All you needed to do was remove the comma (you did that) and your name (you didn't do that), and not change anything else (you changed stuff) and be sure to send it to the same address you have been using right along (you changed the address). Now, it's really not all that difficult; just send the command: unsubscribe humornet ... to the server at . Just those two words, with the spelling as shown above, to the correct address, with no commas, and no names. You can do it; I *know* you can. CL: I SENT IT TO THE RIGHT ADDRESS, YOUR SERVER SENT IT TO THE WRONG PLACE! Me: Just ... follow ... the ... instructions. That's it. Don't get creative, don't add new stuff, don't change addresses. Just follow the instructions. ... Several minutes later, a received the unsub confirmation from the ListProc. I was tempted to copy the message back to her (of course, she'd already receive *one* copy) with a heartfelt note of congratulations, but I thought better of it. Now, I'd bet that most listmoms would have given up long ago and just unsubbed her. Typically, *I* would have, too -- all I really ask is that the person at least TRIES to subscribe/unsubscribe himself. But when someone starts off by saying that the "instructions don't work," or "the server does not work," etc., I turn into the BLOFH (bastard list owner from hell ), and make it my mission to help this poor CluelessIdiot(tm) see the light. I doubt, in most of these cases, that they ever see anything other than a butthead list owner. But it sure helps *me* sleep at night. :-) - Vince S. wavelet@colossus.arl.mil HumourNet: Anyone w/o a sense of humor is at the mercy of the rest of us. From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 9 18:39:13 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id RAA16726 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:34:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id RAA16716 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:34:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from chrome.office.aol.com (chrome.office.aol.com [152.163.67.244]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id NAA23576 for ; Wed, 7 May 1997 13:12:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (brad@localhost) by chrome.office.aol.com (8.8.6.Alpha2/8.8.5/AOL-0.0.7) with ESMTP id QAA29768; Wed, 7 May 1997 16:14:04 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199705072014.QAA29768@chrome.office.aol.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0gamma 1/27/96 Reply-To: KnowlesB@aol.net Organization: America Online, Inc. X-Telefacsimile: (703) 453-4013 X-PGP-Fingerprint: DA 2A 59 B1 A8 BD 4C B2 B0 41 CE 6E BD C3 15 54 X-Face: "HJz{@e(gkOmJfq8b$n:zW8Kk4*`Sz1?<#`g=5p>Wuu7DkDV`m-*p[Yb=?;w(F:L'DHA{mO]=iKKKdH)r%I7K;dvYQ{3Y6"3MW@Y*U_6?>lOw;GIva\?7579Ii|/$t"\+lE cc: LSTOWN-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM, LSTSRV-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM, Valdis Kletnieks , Michael Ramundo , Jeff Kell , Pete Weiss , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: rejected mail - RFC822 conflict ??? In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 07 May 1997 19:54:40 +0200." <199705071932.PAA22699@postman.ops.aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 16:14:03 -0400 From: Brad Knowles Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Your message dated: Wed, 07 May 1997 19:54:40 +0200 > All you have to do then is ignore the source route, which is allowed by > RFC1123. I cannot think of any reason why ignoring the source route would > not address your concerns. See my previous response. I don't feel I have anything more to say on that subject than I've already said. > Incidentally, if a spammer doesn't want to > deal with bounces, there is MAIL FROM:<>... Or did AOL also start > rejecting such messages? This would make AOL useless for managing a > mailing list, among other things. We continue to be compliant with RFC 1123, section 5.2.9. That will not change. In fact, I recently pointed out the necessity to comply with this particular part of RFC 1123 to a security expert who is in the process of making enhancements to "smap", to allow it to make more intelligent decisions about what kind of messages to accept or refuse (dealing with all the same issues I've already solved here at AOL with various sendmail rewrite rules, but instead dealing with them in another product). Source routes in the domain portion are inherently evil beyond reproach, and there's nothing you can do to convince me that they should not be rejected out of hand. Any system that actively propagates this kind of behaviour is likewise inherently evil. Any system that passively allows this kind of behaviour needs to be fixed. > > Essentially as much has been observed by various Internet mail > >experts, many of whom are working on drafting the upcoming standards. > > Brad, maybe I'm not reading this in the light in which it was meant, but > there are probably more Internet mail experts among the people you are > sending this message to than in the group you mentioned, and as you know > technical people tend to be independent thinkers. There are "Internet mail experts" the world over, and as you observe elsewhere in your own message, some of them have some pretty bizarre ideas of what should and should not be done. In fact, I'm certain that many feel this way about me. So be it. However, this is a particular behaviour that has been deprecated for at least six years (RFC 1123, section 5.2.6, as clearly pointed out by Valdis), and it's time that it went completely away. I can't think of too many Internet mail experts that would argue that point, although they may argue that I'm being too vehement or otherwise jumping the gun. > It also > doesn't make much sense to ask people to submit to the wisdom of a task > force working on new Internet drafts which may or may not become Internet > standards in a couple years, let alone industry standards, when at the > same time you refuse to submit to the wisdom of existing Internet > standards with their existing user base. The principle specifically laid out in section 7.5 of draft-ietf-drums-smtpupd-04.txt is one that has been around far longer than that, in fact far longer than the Internet itself. It's been around as long as there have been personal and group property laws, and is based on the concept of "trespass" (specifically, "trespass of chattels") and the right for me (or my company) to do with my own property what I choose (or my company chooses). In this particular case, it is an operational issue that threatens the very existance of the AOL mail system, and we *cannot* afford to allow it to continue unabated in this fashion. Although I recommended this course of action, I am certainly by no means alone here in my desire to implement these kinds of protections. Management pushed for it about as hard as I have. > LISTSERV does not generate source routes, nor has it ever done that. Even > back in 1986, LISTSERV had a strong no-source-routes stance. However, if > presented with a source route it does ignore it gracefully, as you would > expect. The source routes come from LMail, a MTA for VM (also from > L-Soft) which can be configured to implement the original RFC821 reverse > path behaviour where you insert source routes in the MAIL FROM: address > (at no point is a source route added to the RFC822 header). I'm sorry if I mistakenly pointed the finger at Listserv, instead of LMail. Whatever the L-Soft system is that can potentially generate source-routed envelope addresses, I would like to make sure that current and future versions have that feature default to "off" (which appears to already be the case, given your other comments). As far as I'm concerned, this one particular concern of mine is moot. > Even setting aside the fact that the standards require AOL to accept this > syntax, it just does not make any technical sense to reject it, and it > leads to the loss of legitimate mail for AOL's customers. There is nothing in any law that requires me (or my company) to pay to accept messages that are in a format (and/or quantity) such that they threaten the very existance of my property (or the property of my company). There is no protocol on the planet that can legitimately likewise claim to make that kind of stipulation. In fact, there is a law *against* compelling me to pay to accept a message from someone else, and is the basis for much of the current anti-junkmail lawsuits that are pending. However, this isn't a junkmail issue per se, it's an operational systems issue regarding our right to protect the very existance of our private property (the same private property that our customers depend on). -- Brad Knowles MIME/PGP: KnowlesB@aol.net Senior Unix Administrator From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 9 18:40:22 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id RAA17333 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:41:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id RAA17321 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:41:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from chrome.office.aol.com (chrome.office.aol.com [152.163.67.244]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id KAA24331 for ; Thu, 8 May 1997 10:46:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (brad@localhost) by chrome.office.aol.com (8.8.6.Beta1/8.8.5/AOL-0.0.7) with ESMTP id NAA08194; Thu, 8 May 1997 13:45:54 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199705081745.NAA08194@chrome.office.aol.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0gamma 1/27/96 Reply-To: KnowlesB@aol.net Organization: America Online, Inc. X-Telefacsimile: (703) 453-4013 X-PGP-Fingerprint: DA 2A 59 B1 A8 BD 4C B2 B0 41 CE 6E BD C3 15 54 X-Face: "HJz{@e(gkOmJfq8b$n:zW8Kk4*`Sz1?<#`g=5p>Wuu7DkDV`m-*p[Yb=?;w(F:L'DHA{mO]=iKKKdH)r%I7K;dvYQ{3Y6"3MW@Y*U_6?>lOw;GIva\?7579Ii|/$t"\+lE cc: LSTOWN-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM, LSTSRV-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM, Valdis Kletnieks , Michael Ramundo , Jeff Kell , Pete Weiss , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: rejected mail - RFC822 conflict ??? In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 08 May 1997 01:16:19 +0200." <199705080053.UAA18389@postman.ops.aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 08 May 1997 13:45:54 -0400 From: Brad Knowles Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Your message dated: Thu, 08 May 1997 01:16:19 +0200 > >The Internet side is typically about half the total volume of the AOL > >mail system as a whole. > > Internal mail from AOL user 1 to AOL user 2 doesn't go through SMTP and I > don't see how it is relevant to this discussion, other than conveniently > providing the 23M of deliveries you were missing :-) The problem is that the Internet side of the equation is not the limiting factor here. If everything else goes smoothly, the Internet side can *easily* handle that kind of load, without breaking a sweat. I'm confident it could handle twice or even three times that load without too much difficulty, if there weren't problems elsewhere. But, there are problems elsewhere, and to protect the mail system as a whole, we have to use the Internet side to aggressively filter out the illegitimate mail (since virtually all illegitimate mail comes from the Internet, and illegitimate mail as a whole poses more of a risk to the system due to certain aspects of its nature) > > Now, how many million messages did you receive yesterday? > > Receive, not that many. There are the bounces of course, but like any > other large mailing list shop, we receive a lot less than we send. You use the measure you want, we'll use the measure we want. > I > imagine AOL is the opposite and receives a lot more than it sends. Typically, we recieve about twice as much as we send. That's still a boatload of mail that we send, but since the expansion factor per outbound email message is low (on average, about two recipients per message), we don't get your economies of scale with hundred or thousands of recipients from a single message all served by the same set of MXes, etc.... Nevertheless, our outbound system is not the problem here. > Anyway, I think what you really want to know is the number of SMTP > transactions that we've made, regardless of the recipient count, right? Not exactly. Since virtually all mail that is sent is transmitted as soon as it is recived by the other end, it makes very little use of connection caching. Since much of the expense of SMTP transactions is setting up and tearing down the connection (otherwise connection caching wouldn't be an issue), connection caching typically only comes into play when someone is delivering a large number of previously queued messages, perhaps from a mailing list. Since you've got extremely large economies of scale due to large numbers of recipients typically served by a set of MXes, and you've surely optimized your delivery to make maximum use of connection caching, the actual number of SMTP connections you make is actually probably quite small. Considerably smaller than the total number of message envelopes delivered, which is probably considerably smaller than the total number of recipients per message. Making SMTP connections is relatively cheap, since you can choose whether or not to have another queue runner fork off (if you pre-fork off a set of worker processes, then if you've got any worker processes that are currently idle), you can control how much of a load on your system that sending messages presents. You can also control how long you wait for various sorts of things to happen before you time out, so that you deliver large quantities of mail to fast servers in a very short period of time, while slower servers end up getting relegated to the bottom of the list. Since receiving mail is inherently interrupt-driven, and you can't force the other end to make use of connection caching (you can only sit there and wait to accept multiple messages per connection if the other end chooses to send them that way), what I want to count is the total number of SMTP connections you receive per day. Everything else is superfluous. Programming something like delivering large quantities of mail out of a queue is relatively easy, since you don't have to accept connections (or not, if the system load is too high) and then pass them off to child/worker processes, a mechanism that is inherently fork/exec style, but which can be programmed (with no small amount of difficulty) in a pre-fork/worker process style. However, that is at least as hard, if not harder, than writing a program to solve an inherently recursive problem in a non-recursive manner. At least, programmers doing that sort of work have an extensive body of pre-existing work that shows how to use stacks to simulate recursion, so that there's relatively little "new" stuff that has to be done to "unroll" an inherently recursive process into an iterative one. > I have no intention of either giving up my day job, moving to the US or > joining AOL, nor do I see any reason why this would be necessary in order > to accomplish the stated goals. Nevertheless, I was making a serious > business proposal. I will pass on to the mail systems development management that you want to re-write the AOL Internet mail gateway system using LSMTP. If that's something we can do in parallel with our other efforts (and without a great deal of support required to teach you how the back end works), then they might be willing to listen. However, I am not in development, and applying development solutions to operational problems is not a method I have available to me. Only the development folks can decide whether or not that is a solution they can support (However, I think it unlikely, given how thinly they're already stretched). We did previously look at using PMDF as the basis for our gateway system, but rejected it once we realized what the API was, and the amount of programming that would be required on our part to get the messages out of their proprietary internal database and into ours. If we're going to do that level of programming anyway, we might as well write the thing from scratch. > I see that Matt Korn is still your VP of Operations, so it > looks like I may be preaching to the choir :-) He keeps remarking on occasion how much mail could be handled by VM SMTP, but he's changed his tune a bit since we found a bug in that code with regards to the way it handles MX RRs. Especially since we were forced to work that out the hard way, as no one at IBM was willing to work directly with us, and the IBM customers they were willing to work with didn't have enough information about the problem to describe it sufficiently well. After we'd sufficiently "black-boxed" the thing, and worked with these customers applying multiple rounds of "Okay, we've installed this patch to our mainframe, does it work now? No....", we finally got that one worked out. We've also pointed out to him how expensive mainframes still are, how much power, space, and cooling they require, and how many of them we'd require to do the job. Besides, we'd be replacing one sort of mainframe with another (as a part of the overall system), and we know that mainframes inherently do not scale to the size of the operation we have today, much less where we need to be. -- Brad Knowles MIME/PGP: KnowlesB@aol.net Senior Unix Administrator From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 9 18:40:55 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id RAA17202 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:40:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id RAA17192 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:40:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sacmgr.mp.usbr.gov (sacmgr.mp.usbr.gov [140.214.12.4]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id CAA17124 for ; Thu, 8 May 1997 02:42:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by sacto.mp.usbr.gov (MX B5.0) id 1; Thu, 8 May 1997 02:41:12 PDT Date: Thu, 08 May 1997 01:04:42 PDT From: "Henry W. Miller" To: arielle@taronga.com CC: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009B3ED4.46662278.1@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: Re: The "Duh!" Awards Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > From: MX%"arielle@taronga.com" "Stephanie da Silva" 7-MAY-1997 18:35:47.22 > Subj: Re: The "Duh!" Awards > > It's time for a new class, the "Duh" Award. I bring this up > > because it has happened to me twice in the past week and a half. > > Here's mine. > > I occasionally get people saying "please unsubscribe me from your list." > This isn't particularly intuitive, since I have 5 lists runnign on my > server, only two of them mine. Plus because of the PAML, people will > ask me to unsubscribe me to lists I have nothing to do with, but that's > another story. > > Anyhow, this must hit the very bottom of the clueless meter. Recent > exchange: > > CL: Please unsubscribe me from your mailing list. > > Me: Before I can do this, you'll need to tell me the name of the list. > > CL: I don't know.... > > > > Oh, I believe it. The bonus point is when they say: "I don't even know how I got on this list..." > -HWM From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 9 18:49:46 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id SAA22110 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 9 May 1997 18:32:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mushi.colo.neosoft.com (mushi.colo.neosoft.com [206.109.6.82]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id SAA22068 for ; Fri, 9 May 1997 18:32:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 2957 invoked from network); 10 May 1997 01:32:32 -0000 Received: from bonkers.neosoft.com (HELO bonkers.taronga.com) (root@206.109.2.48) by mushi.colo.neosoft.com with SMTP; 10 May 1997 01:32:32 -0000 Received: (from arielle@localhost) by bonkers.taronga.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id UAA26166 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Fri, 9 May 1997 20:32:12 -0500 From: arielle@taronga.com (Stephanie da Silva) Message-Id: <199705100132.UAA26166@bonkers.taronga.com> Subject: comments on ml help file requested To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Fri, 9 May 1997 20:32:12 -0500 (CDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I've written a little primer re: the list managers bane: how to uns*bscr*be from a mailing list. Comments and suggestions would be appreciated. I'm still editing it for typos and style and such, but I'd like to know if there are any serious flaws to be found. URL is here: http://www.NeoSoft.com:80/internet/paml/gettingoff.html From owner-list-managers-outgoing Sat May 10 09:13:31 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id JAA22511 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 10 May 1997 09:07:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dgs.dgsys.com (dgs.dgsys.com [204.97.64.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id JAA22504 for ; Sat, 10 May 1997 09:07:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [204.97.64.246] (hyperreal.dgsys.com) by dgs.dgsys.com (5.0/SMI-SVR4) id AA13689; Sat, 10 May 1997 12:07:58 -0400 Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 12:07:56 -0400 X-Sender: theseus@pop.dgsys.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199705100133.SAA22391@honor.greatcircle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: "Paul L. Moses" Subject: Re: Threats from an unsubscribed list member Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk +From: murr rhame + +On Fri, 9 May 1997, Paul L. Moses wrote: +> This same individual also compiled an index to resources in my archives +> WITHOUT asking and again had to be told that he needed permission to do +> that... + +I don't understand the conflict here. Would you please add some details? +I don't see how someone compiling an "unauthorized" index of your archives +could be a problem. + To begin with, an unauthorized person making a "derivative work" (such as an index) based on the copyrighted works of others is copyright infringement. Secondly, in this particular case, the person was indexing all the "pro"-posts on a controversial subject. This subject had been debated extensively and a small, vocal, extreme minority had shouted down more educated and informed (and cautious) viewpoints. Finally I stepped in and asserted some basic facts and made the subject off-topic. I was concerned that people would follow this index and reach a one-sided conclusion that could be harmful. Lastly, I found it annoying and rude that someone else would rifle through my archives and announce to the world a fait accompli without ever asking me. I keep my archives open as a courtesy and service to anyone who is interested, and I expect a certain level of courtesy in return. Paul the Training-Nutrition mailing list http://www2.dgsys.com/~trnutr/index.html "Breaking news from the top of the food chain." From owner-list-managers-outgoing Sat May 10 16:28:47 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id QAA11002 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 10 May 1997 16:19:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from x4.boston.juno.com (x4.boston.juno.com [205.231.101.22]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id QAA10995 for ; Sat, 10 May 1997 16:19:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from the-true-highlander@juno.com) by x4.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id TyU11283; Sat, 10 May 1997 19:19:43 EDT To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Message-ID: <19970510.181756.14495.0.The-True-Highlander@juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 1.15 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-1,10-11 From: the-true-highlander@juno.com (Duncan McCloud) Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 19:19:43 EDT Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Fellow List Managers, I run a list that is based Fargo, North Dakota. Many of the people on my list have written multiple complaints because the list I run doesn't offer all the things they would like. My list is mainly for chatting and a few other things, and I would like to offer more, but at this time I cannot. Anyway,seeing as we are all list managers I was hoping you could tell me some of the list you know of so that I can tell the people on my list were they can get other options and in the process end their complaints. You help would be greatly appreciated, and I thank you in advance for it. From owner-list-managers-outgoing Sun May 11 02:58:31 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id CAA13404 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 11 May 1997 02:49:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.oulu.fi (lists.oulu.fi [130.231.241.85]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id CAA13397 for ; Sun, 11 May 1997 02:48:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (mhotti@localhost) by lists.oulu.fi (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id MAA13467; Sun, 11 May 1997 12:49:25 +0300 Date: Sun, 11 May 1997 12:49:24 +0300 (EET DST) From: Marko Hotti X-Sender: mhotti@majordomo.oulu.fi To: Duncan McCloud cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: your mail In-Reply-To: <19970510.181756.14495.0.The-True-Highlander@juno.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Sat, 10 May 1997, Duncan McCloud wrote: > this time I cannot. Anyway,seeing as we are all list managers I was > hoping you could tell me some of the list you know of so that I can tell > the people on my list were they can get other options and in the process > end their complaints. You help would be greatly appreciated, and I thank > you in advance for it. It would help us greatly if you'd provide us with more information on your current platform. (Why is it that so often people forget this basic rule of being as spesific as possible when making technical questions??). Most important: Which mailing list management software are you using? Which features have the subscribers requested?? Marko Hotti Systems Administrator * Oulu University Computer Services Center /List Services Finland Tel: +358-(0)40-552-8415 http://www.lists.oulu.fi/ From owner-list-managers-outgoing Sun May 11 16:43:20 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id QAA19092 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 11 May 1997 16:33:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from x4.boston.juno.com (x4.boston.juno.com [205.231.101.22]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id QAA19085 for ; Sun, 11 May 1997 16:32:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from the-true-highlander@juno.com) by x4.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id TAB12314; Sun, 11 May 1997 19:33:10 EDT To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Message-ID: <19970511.183102.7143.0.The-True-Highlander@juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 1.15 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-1,8 From: the-true-highlander@juno.com (Duncan McCloud) Date: Sun, 11 May 1997 19:33:10 EDT Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Fellow List Managers, Once again I write to you. Yesterday I posted a message asking for help and I got a lot of responses. Unfortunatly, today my e-mail program slightly died on me and in the process deleted all the messages I should have gotten. It would be greatly appreciated that -if- you sent me mail today in response to yesterdays message to please send it again because like I said, my computer went hay wire and deleted it. Thank you. From owner-list-managers-outgoing Sun May 11 23:14:13 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id XAA06033 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 11 May 1997 23:12:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id XAA06022 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 11 May 1997 23:12:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ginger.vnet.net (ginger.vnet.net [166.82.1.69]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id UAA23689 for ; Sat, 10 May 1997 20:08:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from katie.vnet.net (murr@katie.vnet.net [166.82.1.7]) by ginger.vnet.net (8.8.5/8.8.2) with ESMTP id XAA15076 for ; Sat, 10 May 1997 23:09:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id XAA15872 for ; Sat, 10 May 1997 23:09:24 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: katie.vnet.net: murr owned process doing -bs Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 23:09:23 -0400 (EDT) From: murr rhame Reply-To: murr rhame To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Counter Spam In-Reply-To: <199705100132.UAA26166@bonkers.taronga.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I recently received a few forged subscriptions attempting to subscribe to several lists. This same inet97 address has recently made hundreds of posts to Usenet advertizing spam E-mail services. The inet97 address is not accepting E-mail. The subscribe receipts bounced. - murr - From owner-list-managers-outgoing Sun May 11 23:17:12 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id XAA05835 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 11 May 1997 23:10:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id XAA05823 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 11 May 1997 23:10:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ginger.vnet.net (ginger.vnet.net [166.82.1.69]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id TAA01873 for ; Fri, 9 May 1997 19:35:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from katie.vnet.net (murr@katie.vnet.net [166.82.1.7]) by ginger.vnet.net (8.8.5/8.8.2) with ESMTP id WAA21550; Fri, 9 May 1997 22:35:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA24914; Fri, 9 May 1997 22:35:26 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: katie.vnet.net: murr owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 9 May 1997 22:35:25 -0400 (EDT) From: murr rhame To: Vince Sabio cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: The "Duh!" Awards 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 Thu, 8 May 1997, Vince Sabio wrote: > ... Moreover, if you read the instructions REEEEALLY carefully, you also > note that you are not supposed to include your name in an unsubscribe > request -- though the server *usually* won't care if you do. So, the > command should look like this: > > unsubscribe humornet You may want to consider adding the following line to your Listproc 6.0c config file: option relaxed_syntax # Ignore extra arguments in user commands. This is noted in the "server" docs as follows: relaxed_syntax: by default, the system complains when a request is given more arguments than expected. This turns such checking off. This will ignore any extra junk on commands sent to listproc. With the relaxed option turned on, adding a real name to an unsubscribe command will not make it bomb... I wish there were an option to ignore command words in the subject line of mail send to listproc as well. Apparently, listproc uses the same subject line filters for posts to mailing lists and for commands sent to listproc. The relaxed option will not help them spell the list name correctly. ;-) - murr - From owner-list-managers-outgoing Sun May 11 23:20:09 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id XAA05854 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 11 May 1997 23:10:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id XAA05838 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 11 May 1997 23:10:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailbox.neosoft.com (mailbox.neosoft.com [206.109.1.16]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id WAA11967 for ; Fri, 9 May 1997 22:04:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from praline.no.neosoft.com (praline.no.NeoSoft.COM [206.27.160.253]) by mailbox.neosoft.com (8.8.4/8.8.3) with SMTP id AAA24869 for ; Sat, 10 May 1997 00:04:49 -0500 (CDT) Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 00:04:49 -0500 (CDT) From: Ray Jones cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: The "Duh!" Awards 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 Thu, 8 May 1997, Vince Sabio wrote: > That's a tough act to follow. I've got a *few* favorites, but this one > was actually starting to get me annoyed: > > CL: I'm trying to unsubscribe from your mailing list, but your instructions > do not work. > > Me: Huh. They seem to be working for most everyone else who has > unsubscribed recently. What seems to be thy problem? When I first started my list, I had two people who made every mistake in the book. They wrote to the wrong addresses, issued the wrong commands, spelled the lists and the commands wrong plus posted multiple messages to the list telling me how crummy the list was and how nothing worked right. As you said, it worked fine for everyone else. The true irony of the situation is that one of those complaining was a professor of computer science at a major univeristy and the other was a PHD candidate in Biomolecular Medicine (or at least that's what their signature files stated). -- Regards, Ray Jones **************************************************************** Coming to New Orleans? Contact "Big Ray the Buggy Driver" Licensed Tour Guide Historical Tours through the romantic French Quarter in New Orleans in a mule-drawn "vis-a-vis" carriage while enjoying its ambiance and hear about our history, sites of interest and way of life. Cellular Phone 504-884-9572 Digital Beeper 504-547-8032 CURRENTLY ON SABBATICAL & NOT AVAILABLE FOR TOURS ray.jones@mail.sstar.com http://www.neosoft.com/~rayjones/welcome.html "Big Ray's" New Orleans Mailing List Instructions To SUBSCRIBE: send "subscribe noml" TO: majordomo@communique.net From owner-list-managers-outgoing Mon May 12 01:28:50 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id BAA17412 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 12 May 1997 01:23:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from frege.math.ethz.ch (frege-d-math-north-g-west.math.ethz.ch [129.132.145.3]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id BAA17356 for ; Mon, 12 May 1997 01:22:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pythagoras.math.ethz.ch (bollow@pythagoras [129.132.147.4]) by frege.math.ethz.ch (8.6.12/Main-STAT-mailer) with ESMTP id KAA22644; Mon, 12 May 1997 10:22:25 +0200 Received: (bollow@localhost) by pythagoras.math.ethz.ch (8.6.9/D-MATH-client) id KAA08842; Mon, 12 May 1997 10:23:17 +0200 Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 10:23:17 +0200 Message-Id: <199705120823.KAA08842@pythagoras.math.ethz.ch> From: Norbert Bollow To: arielle@taronga.com CC: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-reply-to: <199705100132.UAA26166@bonkers.taronga.com> (arielle@taronga.com) Subject: Re: comments on ml help file requested Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > I've written a little primer re: the list managers bane: how to uns*bscr*be > from a mailing list. Great!!! > Comments and suggestions would be appreciated. It would be even better if you could include a strong exhortation that people who write to the list-owner to request uns*bscr*ption should include a list of all their past and present e-mail addresses, to make it easier for the poor list-owner to figure out by what address the user might be subscr*bed. May blessings from the eternal God surprise and overtake you! Norbert. -- Norbert Bollow (Zuerich, Switzerland; http://pobox.com/~nb) serving Christ Jesus; co-moderator of the CHURCHPLANTERS E-mail Conference. From owner-list-managers-outgoing Mon May 12 12:28:44 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id MAA01881 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 12 May 1997 12:14:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from private.lists.apple.com (private.lists.apple.com [17.254.0.152]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id MAA01858 for ; Mon, 12 May 1997 12:14:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [17.219.12.99] (A17-219-12-99.apple.com [17.219.12.99]) by private.lists.apple.com (8.6.10/A/UX 3.1) with ESMTP id MAA02431; Mon, 12 May 1997 12:16:18 -0700 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 12:08:51 -0700 To: Ray Jones From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: The "Duh!" Awards Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 10:04 PM -0700 5/9/97, Ray Jones wrote: >the list telling me how crummy the list was and how nothing worked right. >As you said, it worked fine for everyone else. My general response: "Well, my server has about a 98% success rate by my users, and I've found that the other 2% are usually people who didn't read or aren't following the instructions. I'm always interested in hearing where my instructions can be improved, so if you'll tell me what isn't working for you, I'll see if I can fix it" The only responses I get to that are rude... They've told me where to put the instructions, but never what to fix... (you can guess why...) This is actually a subset of a larger issue. For people who send mail to various places (postmaster, etc), there's boilerplate that gets sent pointing them in the right directions. Ditto people who post admin requests to the list (I *never* perform these. They always get pointed towards the proper answer. I don't believe in reinforcing wrong behaviors, because people then think those behaviors are correct -- they worked, no?). well over 99% of the folks who get that boilerplate act on it and life is wonderful for all. About 1 in 100 write and thank me for the instructions. About 1 in 300, roughly, write back to scream and bitch. The most common word is rude, but arrogant and various filthies are up there. Go figure. Me, I figure if I'm only getting yelled at by 1 in 300, I'm doing pretty damn good... -- Chuq Von Rospach (chuq@apple.com) Apple IS&T Mail List Gnome Plaidworks Consulting (chuqui@plaidworks.com) ( +-+ The home for Hockey on the net) From owner-list-managers-outgoing Mon May 12 14:29:22 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id OAA18960 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 12 May 1997 14:21:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from prawn.fishy.net (flounder.fishy.net [206.156.56.34]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id OAA18925 for ; Mon, 12 May 1997 14:21:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from grayling.fishy.net (grayling.fishy.net [172.16.3.90]) by prawn.fishy.net (8.8.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA29920; Mon, 12 May 1997 17:22:06 -0400 Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 17:22:06 -0400 Message-Id: <199705122122.RAA29920@prawn.fishy.net> X-Sender: bonnie@pop.fishy.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.1.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Bonnie Scott Subject: Prodigy.com addresses: 5/11-5/13 problems Cc: adaniels@ntsutils.prodigy.com Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hello. This is to let you know that your list members with @prodigy.com addresses may be having problems receiving Internet mail. We are having some problems which we anticipate will be resolved tomorrow morning, although the backlog of mail deliveries will take a while to work off. This affects Prodigy Classic members @prodigy.com only, not Prodigy Internet members with addresses @prodigy.net, nor staff members @staff.prodigy.com. OUTBOUND internet mail is not affected for these users, so you may receive inquiries about your list; Prodigy-to-Prodigy e-mail is also unaffected, so they may not realize there is a larger mail problem; only Internet to P*Classic mail is affected. Our inbound mail gateways should be back up well before your mail machines give up trying to deliver to our members, so no mail should be lost. If you have any questions about this, please let me know at bonnie@staff.prodigy.com. Sorry for the inconvenience, Bonnie Scott this has been an UNofficial announcement from Prodigy Sertvices Corp. From owner-list-managers-outgoing Tue May 13 05:27:13 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id FAA15770 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 13 May 1997 05:11:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cyberq.quality.org (cyberq.quality.org [199.181.80.151]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id FAA15747 for ; Tue, 13 May 1997 05:11:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (help@localhost) by cyberq.quality.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id IAA01876 for ; Tue, 13 May 1997 08:12:03 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 08:12:03 -0400 (EDT) From: "Bill Casti, CQA (System Administrator)" To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: check_mail ruleset for sendmail.cf Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Greetings: This addition to your sendmail.cf file will automatically reject any incoming mail to your system that comes from a domain that can't be resolved. As you already know, most spams come from forged domains. This'll catch 'em and toss 'em before you see 'em. Add this to your sendmail.cf file, right before the box reading "REWRITING RULES". Be sure to "tab" where there are currently spaces and to un-wrap any lines that "wrap" in transfer, since sendmail will choke on on spaces and on wrapped lines. I have it installed on my systems, and I know of at least one ISP that is using it. It works great and has cut down the dreck substantially. Regards. Bill ---------- Forwarded message ---------- ############################################ ### ANTI SPAM / FORGE Ruleset ### ############################################ Scheck_mail # check for valid domain name (incompatible with DeliveryMode=defer) R$* $: $>3 $1 make domain canonical R $* < @ $+ . > $: tag resolved names R $* < @ $+ > $#error $: 451 Domain must resolve Error ROK $@ OK Okay R$+ $: $1 Okay ------------------- End Forwarded Message -------------------- ============================================================================= Bill Casti, CQA Email: help@quality.org - Domain Owner, QUALITY.ORG Pager: +1 800 604 6149 - List Moderator, "TQM in Manufacturing and Service Industries" - Chairman, Electronic Media ASQC Section 0511 (Northern VA) Section Email: E-media@quality.org - 1997-98 Chair-elect, Executive Board, ASQC Section 0511 - Senior Administrator, Internet Systems, Fed. Emergency Mgmt. Agency (FEMA) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Get Your New CyberQ Teeshirt now! See the Design at http://www.quality.org/html/teeshirts.html ============================================================================= From owner-list-managers-outgoing Tue May 13 09:28:44 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id JAA14794 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 13 May 1997 09:13:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from revnet1.revnet.com (revnet1.revnet.com [198.51.35.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id JAA14731 for ; Tue, 13 May 1997 09:13:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from madmax.revnet.com (madmax.revnet.com [198.51.35.101]) by revnet1.revnet.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA23369; Tue, 13 May 1997 11:15:43 -0500 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970513111329.00742000@revnet.com> X-Sender: mmead@revnet.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 11:13:47 -0500 To: awest@webster.m-w.com (Amy West), list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Marc Mead Subject: Re: announcement list on listproc vs. majordomo Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 01:51 PM 5/8/97 EDT, you wrote: >So, we don't have an MLM installed yet, and I'm trying to decide >which is best for doing an announcement list (where only 1 or 2 people >are allowed to post). Anyone have any experience setting up >such a list on ListProc or Majordomo and an opinion as to the ease >of doing it? Have you looked at GroupMaster ( http://www.groupmaster.com )? It's perfect for announcement lists & moderated lists, currently being used by several popular email newsletters including I-Sales and I-Advertising. This may be speaking heresy here, but GroupMaster is NT-based and requires not one bit of Unix coding knowledge---all admin is done thru an easy web interface. NT also gives it some powerful database functionality (dynamic message scheduling, read-rates, tracking embedded URL click-throughs) not easily achieved with traditional MLM solutions. Give it a look. Marc Mead From owner-list-managers-outgoing Tue May 13 14:57:15 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id OAA29362 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 13 May 1997 14:52:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sacusr.mp.usbr.gov (sacusr.mp.usbr.gov [140.214.12.2]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id OAA29296 for ; Tue, 13 May 1997 14:52:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by sacto.mp.usbr.gov (MX C5.0) id 1; Tue, 13 May 1997 14:48:01 -0700 Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 14:47:58 -0700 From: "Henry W. Miller" To: list-managers@greatcirlce.com CC: henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov Message-ID: <009B4335.1D14F740.1@sacto.mp.usbr.gov> Subject: RFI - Re: Any creative TCP/IP solutions to stop junk E-Mail? Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > From: MX%"MX-List@MadGoat.com" 13-MAY-1997 14:41:37.64 > Subj: Re: Any creative TCP/IP solutions to stop junk E-Mail? Does anyone have any information on the enclosed post - i.e., is it "too good to be true", is it on the level, etc? -HWM > , lewis@jag.mitre.org (Keith A. Lewis) > >"Randy N. Baker" writes in article <970507084415.d98@gc1.georcoll.on.ca> dated Wed, 7 May 1997 8:44:15 -0400: > >>I am getting tired of finding unsolicited junk E-Mail, and I don't think > >>sending E-Mail back to the originating sender does, or will do any good. > > >I'd settle for a system-level filter that would drop or bounce messages from > >specific domains. I run UCX SMTP and MX over UCX. Can anybody point me to > >a solution? > > I receive the following message in March. I did not respond to it because > it is basically another spam, therefore I am not in any way endorsing it. > But if it's for real it might be a good thing. The web page is there; they > have a phone number and the nameserver has a listing for netchem.com. That's > a lot more real than your typical spam. I'm just not sure I want my name on > another list. > > Has anyone else seen this or heard of anyone responding to this? > > Thanks, > ================================================================ > Irv Eisen, Systems Manager > Cancer Center Information Systems Email: IRV@CCSTAT.MC.DUKE.EDU > Duke University Medical Center > DUMC Box 3958 Voice: (919) 681-5405 > Durham, NC 27710 Fax : (919) 681-8028 > ================================================================ > > > =========================================================================== > > From: MX%"remove@netchem.com" 22-MAR-1997 11:05:34.80 > To: IRV > CC: > Subj: Please Help Yourself, Help Others & Help the Internet > > Dear Sir/Madam, > > Your email address is on many spammers' lists. > That is why you received so much junk email lately. > > Most of the spammers will stop sending you junk email > if you ask them to remove your email address from their lists. > > But the problem is that there are too many spammers. > The spammers are not supposed to send you junk email in the first place. > Why do you even have to spend your time to reply? > > We are compiling a REMOVE list. It is much faster for the spammers > to remove your email address if we send them the list because most > of the spammers use automated software. > > To add your name to the REMOVE list, simply reply to this email. > You do not have to write anything. It is FREE! > > We are also compiling a blacklist of spammers. If you receive junk email > from someone, please forward the original message to list@netchem.com. > > Please do not use spammers to advertise your product on the Internet. > It is not easy to send out 1 million email. The spammer will take your > money and disappear. > > To avoid further spamming, we send out this message only to limited number > of users. Please forward this email to your friends if you think it is > useful to them. > > Sincerely, > Jerry > > ------------------------------------------------- > Jerry Wang, PhD, Chemechanics, Inc. > http://www.netchem.com, mailto:jerryw@netchem.com > ------------------------------------------------- > From owner-list-managers-outgoing Tue May 13 18:27:00 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id SAA05028 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 13 May 1997 18:20:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ginger.vnet.net (ginger.vnet.net [166.82.1.69]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id SAA04936 for ; Tue, 13 May 1997 18:19:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from katie.vnet.net (murr@katie.vnet.net [166.82.1.7]) by ginger.vnet.net (8.8.5/8.8.2) with ESMTP id VAA01143 for ; Tue, 13 May 1997 21:20:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA02017 for ; Tue, 13 May 1997 21:20:52 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: katie.vnet.net: murr owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 21:20:52 -0400 (EDT) From: murr rhame To: List Managers Subject: Re: RFI - Re: Any creative TCP/IP solutions to stop junk E-Mail? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Tue, 13 May 1997, Henry W. Miller wrote: > Does anyone have any information on the enclosed post - i.e., is > it "too good to be true", is it on the level, etc? > > We are compiling a REMOVE list. It is much faster for the spammers > > to remove your email address if we send them the list because most > > of the spammers use automated software. I have read of "remove lists" being used to collect valid addresses for the purpose of sending more spam. I'm not aware of any spammers who would honor a remove list. I presume most spammers would welcome the opportunity to collect more addresses to add to their spam lists. To summarize, do not sign up unless you want to receive more spam. - murr - From owner-list-managers-outgoing Wed May 14 05:57:57 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id FAA20677 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 14 May 1997 05:36:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from webdreams.com (chesler.mv.com [192.80.84.129]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id FAA20660 for ; Wed, 14 May 1997 05:36:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost by webdreams.com (5.65v3.2/1.1.10.5/29Aug96-0251AM) id AA03520; Wed, 14 May 1997 08:37:19 -0400 Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 08:37:19 -0400 (EDT) From: Brock Rozen To: List Managers Subject: Auto-Bounce Handling Message-Id: X-Backup: Disable X-Url: http://www.webdreams.com/~brozen Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi, Does anybody know of any programs that handle bounces on a UNIX platform? Thanks, ------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Brock Rozen | brozen@webdreams.com | http://www.webdreams.com/~brozen | ------------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-list-managers-outgoing Wed May 14 07:47:44 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id GAA29237 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 14 May 1997 06:51:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from frege.math.ethz.ch (frege-d-math-north-g-west.math.ethz.ch [129.132.145.3]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id GAA29074 for ; Wed, 14 May 1997 06:49:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from findel.math.ethz.ch (bollow@findel [129.132.146.134]) by frege.math.ethz.ch (8.6.12/Main-STAT-mailer) with ESMTP id PAA19324; Wed, 14 May 1997 15:49:33 +0200 Received: (bollow@localhost) by findel.math.ethz.ch (8.6.9/D-MATH-client) id PAA22781; Wed, 14 May 1997 15:50:27 +0200 Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 15:50:27 +0200 Message-Id: <199705141350.PAA22781@findel.math.ethz.ch> From: Norbert Bollow To: brozen@webdreams.com CC: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-reply-to: (message from Brock Rozen on Wed, 14 May 1997 08:37:19 -0400 (EDT)) Subject: Re: Auto-Bounce Handling Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > Hi, > > Does anybody know of any programs that handle bounces on a UNIX platform? > > Thanks, > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > | Brock Rozen | brozen@webdreams.com | http://www.webdreams.com/~brozen | > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Greetings! First of all let me mention that there is a mailing list for developers of such beasts. To subscribe, send email to with the following command in the body of your email message: subscribe bh-workers Unfortunately, nothing much has happened on that list yet. However, I've written such a perl script called 'bouncefilter'; I'm currently using it for 14 mailing lists on two servers, and I'm very satisfied. Unfortunately the current version will only work with my (heavily hacked) version of Majordomo (which I cannot make publicly available due to restrictions in the Majordomo license). The good news is that today someone has e-mailed me and expressed interest in helping me with making a public release of 'bouncefilter' for the official Majordomo versions 1.94.*; at that stage it would be very little extra work to include support for other mailing list managers. My situation is that I have a very heavy workload, but if there is sufficient interest (and willingness to help e.g. with alpha testing) I'd be willing to invest the additional effort to make it work with whatever mailing list manager you're using. If someone is interested, please drop me private e-mail, letting me know what mailing list manager you're using and what kind of help you might be able to offer. A brief description of bouncefilter follows: My 'bouncefilter' script receives all messages to owner-$Listname\@@myhost and checks if they are delivery status notifications (DSNs). Those which are not DSNs are forwarded to the list-owners. Those DSNs which conform to RFC 1894 (which is a proposed internet standard for the format of DSNs) are parsed and acted upon as follows: To those addresses which are marked as "failed", bouncefilter sends a warning message which starts like this: From: owner-$ListName\@$whereami Subject: Warning: It was not possible to send you e-mail! This is just a warning message to let you know that we got an error message for your e-mail address. This means that you did not receive one or more items of mail from the $ListName list, and possibly other, more personal e-mail messages did not reach you either. The warning messages also contains a copy of the human-readable part of the DSN. To each of these addresses, these warning messages are repeated on a daily basis unless no "failed" DSN arrives from that address. If after five days there are still "failed" DSNs from that address, the address is automatically unsubscribed. Bouncefilter still sends daily warning messages (until one of them does not bounce with a "failed" DSN) for 25 more days which start like this: From: owner-$ListName\@$whereami Subject: Warning: You're off the $ListName list now! After we received error messages which indicated that it was not possible to send e-mail to your address, your address was removed from the $ListName list $Days. Unfortunately in such a situation it is normally not possible to notify you of the problem, because e-mail will not reach you. What we do in such a situation is that we try to send you a warning message like this every day for a whole month until one of the messages gets through to you. Since you read this, possibly the problem has gone away now, and you might want to subscribe again to the $ListName list. You can do this by sending the command subscribe $ListName in the body of an e-mail message To: Needless to say, the list-owners receive a daily e-mail message with a log of what is going on. I've also modified majordomo so that this log also contains single-line entries for SUBSCRIBEs, UNSUBSCRIBESs, etc. There are three special cases of which I haven't explained yet how my bouncefilter treats them: a) The (unfortunately still very frequent) case of DSNs which don't conform to RFC1894. b) The address (which is subscribed to a list) forwards to an invalid address which might generate error messages for which don't mention the subscribed address at all. c) Someone subscribed a local exploder to my list but goofed so that the DSNs go to my owner-$Listname alias instead of going to the operator of the local exploder. All of these are handled by a simple trick: Every 10 days or so, (the frequency of this can be set from the configuration file) resend sends one of the list's messages in a special way: Instead of sending the message to the -outgoing alias with an envelope-from of owner-$Listname\@$whereami, the message is sent individually to each subscriber with a special envelope-from of bouncefilter+$ListName=$1=$2\@$whereami where $1 and $2 are obtained as follows: $Addr=$Address; $Addr=~s/=/=.=/g; $Addr=~/^(.*)\@(.*)$/; The processing of error bounces for these addresses relies on the feature of sendmail that local delivery of messages addressed to an address of the form $User+$Extra delivers to the mailbox or alias $User. Bouncefilter will extract the information which is contained in the $Extra from the To: header. (this is not the perfect solution, and in principle I'd know how to improve it, but that would require me to hack the sendmail.cf and I don't have time for that) All such bounces which are not recognized (by some simple heuristics) as "delay notifications" are treated as failed DSNs, as above. May blessings from the eternal God surprise and overtake you! Norbert. -- Norbert Bollow (Zuerich, Switzerland; http://pobox.com/~nb) serving Christ Jesus; co-moderator of the CHURCHPLANTERS E-mail Conference. From owner-list-managers-outgoing Wed May 14 08:28:05 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id IAA06550 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 14 May 1997 08:25:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from MIT.EDU (SOUTH-STATION-ANNEX.MIT.EDU [18.72.1.2]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id IAA06529 for ; Wed, 14 May 1997 08:25:46 -0700 (PDT) From: rlcarr@MIT.EDU Received: from SUNDIAL.MIT.EDU by MIT.EDU with SMTP id AA17672; Wed, 14 May 97 11:26:49 EDT Received: by sundial.MIT.EDU.MIT.EDU (8.8.5/4.7) id PAA16195; Wed, 14 May 1997 15:26:39 GMT Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 15:26:39 GMT Message-Id: <199705141526.PAA16195@sundial.MIT.EDU.MIT.EDU> To: list-managers-digest@GreatCircle.COM Subject: check_mail ruleset for sendmail.cf Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk What exactly is a "domain that can't be resolved"? I'm starting to get worried that some anti-spam measure are going to cause email from UUCP hosts (like my home machine) to be rejected as spam because its return address is not a machine that's on the net. In my particular case, the hostname of my home machine is (say) homemachine. The domain name of my UUCP provider (which IS on the net) is (say) isp.net. Mail to users on my home machine is addressed to user@homemachine.isp.net, and email from said users has a return address of the same thing. So, under anti-spam measures like the check_mail ruleset, will mail from my home machine be bounced because "homemachine.isp.net" cannot be resolved (if you try to ping it you'll get "unknown host"), or will it be accepted because "isp.net" is a valid domain, or will it be accepted because my UUCP feed provides an MX record for homemachine.isp.net ? == Rich From owner-list-managers-outgoing Wed May 14 10:11:42 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id JAA13175 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 14 May 1997 09:11:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cyberq.quality.org (cyberq.quality.org [199.181.80.151]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id JAA13056 for ; Wed, 14 May 1997 09:10:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (help@localhost) by cyberq.quality.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id MAA04865; Wed, 14 May 1997 12:12:11 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 12:12:11 -0400 (EDT) From: "Bill Casti, CQA (System Administrator)" To: rlcarr@MIT.EDU cc: list-managers-digest@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: check_mail ruleset for sendmail.cf In-Reply-To: <199705141526.PAA16195@sundial.MIT.EDU.MIT.EDU> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk It will be accepted if you're configured to resolve on the domain name only. It will bounce if you're configured to require a machine name + domain name for resolution. Depends on how you've got your DNS set up. It's not a function of the script. Regards. Bill On Wed, 14 May 1997 rlcarr@MIT.EDU wrote: > > What exactly is a "domain that can't be resolved"? I'm starting to get > worried that some anti-spam measure are going to cause email from UUCP > hosts (like my home machine) to be rejected as spam because its return > address is not a machine that's on the net. > > In my particular case, the hostname of my home machine is (say) homemachine. > The domain name of my UUCP provider (which IS on the net) is (say) isp.net. > Mail to users on my home machine is addressed to user@homemachine.isp.net, > and email from said users has a return address of the same thing. > > So, under anti-spam measures like the check_mail ruleset, will mail > from my home machine be bounced because "homemachine.isp.net" cannot > be resolved (if you try to ping it you'll get "unknown host"), or will > it be accepted because "isp.net" is a valid domain, or will it be accepted > because my UUCP feed provides an MX record for homemachine.isp.net ? > > == Rich > From owner-list-managers-outgoing Wed May 14 23:12:16 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id WAA02653 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 14 May 1997 22:58:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id WAA02635 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Wed, 14 May 1997 22:58:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nicarao.apc.org.ni ([205.218.249.2]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id JAA19851 for ; Wed, 14 May 1997 09:45:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nicarao (nicarao.apc.org.ni [205.218.249.2]) by nicarao.apc.org.ni (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA21439; Wed, 14 May 1997 10:50:08 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <3379ED40.3F54BC7E@nicarao.apc.org.ni> Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 10:50:08 -0600 From: Juan Leonel Navas Alfaro Organization: Nodo Nicarao X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.4 sun4m) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Approve command in Eudora Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi, I just compiled and run majordomo on my system ( Sun OS 4.1.4 ) and it works perfect. The only thing I'm unable to do right now is use the approve command from Eudora light 3.01 to approve a posting ( for windows 95 ). The approve command works perfect if I add a header to pine ( Version 3.91 ): From owner-list-managers-outgoing Thu May 15 01:27:17 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id BAA22937 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 15 May 1997 01:26:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from endeavor.flash.net (endeavor.flash.net [208.194.223.40]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id BAA22910 for ; Thu, 15 May 1997 01:26:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [208.194.196.36] (auasc1-36.flash.net [208.194.196.36]) by endeavor.flash.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id DAA16052 for ; Thu, 15 May 1997 03:23:36 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 03:23:36 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199705130826.BAA16329@honor.greatcircle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Marco Scavo Subject: New List Admn Probs: 2 questions Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I'm a todler in the list administration community, just having started my list about two months ago, so I could really use some advice. As with all mailing lists, some subscribers are more active than others. Unfortunately, the two *most* active subscribers that I have insist on butting heads every chance they get. They're both valuable contributers of information to my list, but both equally devoid of common sense. I'm not sure that either one of them have understood a single one of my pleas to handle things privately. I'm worried that they're both creating an unwelcoming atmosphere and discouraging participation. How should I handle this situation? Marco "Cu' cchi=F9 capisci, cchi=F9 patisci." Marco Scavo Austin, Tx mscavo@flash.net http://www.flash.net/~mscavo/ From owner-list-managers-outgoing Thu May 15 07:28:14 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id HAA29924 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 15 May 1997 07:21:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shado.jaguNET.com (shado.jaguNET.com [206.156.208.2]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id HAA29916 for ; Thu, 15 May 1997 07:21:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [206.156.212.58] (port1-26.jaguNET.com [206.156.212.58]) by shado.jaguNET.com (8.8.5/jag-2.4) with SMTP id KAA17704 for ; Thu, 15 May 1997 10:23:02 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199705151423.KAA17704@shado.jaguNET.com> Subject: Re: Approve command in Eudora Date: Thu, 15 May 97 10:24:56 -0400 x-sender: pautsch@pophost.jagunet.com x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0, March 15, 1997 From: Linda Pautsch To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On 5/14/97 12:50 PM, Juan Leonel Navas Alfaro wrote >Hi, > >I just compiled and run majordomo on my system ( Sun OS 4.1.4 ) and it >works perfect. The only thing I'm unable to do right now is use the >approve command from Eudora light 3.01 to approve a posting ( for >windows 95 ). The approve command works perfect if I add a header to >pine ( Version 3.91 ) I use Eudora light (mac) to approve messages on a majordomo list and have found that it won't work unless I have quoted-printable and wrapping turned off. The approval message looks like: Approved: approvalpassword >From owner-list Thu Mar 20 12:46:51 1997 Variety of headers of original message headers headers Body of original message On the majordomo-users list some people have said that they delete some of the headers, but you shouldn't have to do that. All I do is add the "Approved" line immediately before the ">From owner-list" line. The only other problem you might run into is if one of the header lines is too long - there is a way to break the long line so majordomo will recognize it (I forget the syntax - it's in the docs). Hope this helps. You could also try the majordomo-users list hosted at GreatCircle.COM (majordomo-users@GreatCircle.COM). You can get archives from the majordomo server there, or you can try the searchable archives at: . One thing that was just mentioned on majordomo-users is that the faq which is distributed with the latest version of majordomo is out-of-date, and is incorrect specifically when referring to approving messages. (The old faq says in question 3.10 that there should be a blank line before and after the Approved: line, and the latest says that there should *not* be a blank line before and after the Approved: line. Here's the quote from the correct faq: The easiest way is to forward the original message to the list, add the line "Approved: _approval-password_" to the very first line of the body, and then the entire contents of the original message. (meaning there should not be a blank line before and after the "Approved:" line.)) Linda Pautsch pautsch@jagunet.com From owner-list-managers-outgoing Thu May 15 10:57:18 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id KAA20240 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 15 May 1997 10:54:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kitsune.swcp.com (swcp.com [198.59.115.2]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id KAA20233 for ; Thu, 15 May 1997 10:54:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from lazlo@localhost) by kitsune.swcp.com (8.8.5/1.2.3) id LAA27138 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 15 May 1997 11:55:18 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <199705151755.LAA27138@kitsune.swcp.com> Subject: New List Admn Probs: 2 questions To: list-managers@greatcircle.com (lm) Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 11:55:18 -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 > As with all mailing lists, some subscribers are more active than others. > Unfortunately, the two *most* active subscribers that I have insist on > butting heads every chance they get. They're both valuable contributers of > information to my list, but both equally devoid of common sense. > > I'm worried that they're both creating an unwelcoming atmosphere and > discouraging participation. How should I handle this situation? I'd set things up so their postings are bounced to you for approval until they both learn to behave. -- ::: Lazlo (lazlo@swcp.com; http://www.swcp.com/lazlo) ::: Internet Music Wantlists: http://www.swcp.com/lazlo/Wantlists From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 16 12:12:58 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id LAA06031 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 16 May 1997 11:57:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from proxy4.ba.best.com (proxy4.ba.best.com [206.184.139.15]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id LAA06012 for ; Fri, 16 May 1997 11:57:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shellx.best.com (shellx.best.com [206.86.0.11]) by proxy4.ba.best.com (8.8.5/8.8.3) with ESMTP id LAA18114 for ; Fri, 16 May 1997 11:57:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from cnorman@localhost) by shellx.best.com (8.8.5/8.8.3) id LAA15145; Fri, 16 May 1997 11:25:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 11:25:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199705161825.LAA15145@shellx.best.com> From: Cyndi Norman To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM CC: cnorman@shellx.best.com Subject: Netscape mail and headers Reply-to: cnorman@best.com Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I've just recieved my second complaint from a potential subscriber that the Netscape mailer will not allow them to edit the subject header. My list software requires authentication of subscriptions by sending back a long subject header after changing the final word from REJECT to ACCEPT. The first person managed to get it to work but I don't know if he figured it out or if he followed my last-resort advice to cut and paste the header into a new message. The second person is still working on it. Now I don't believe this "I can't edit the subject header" story for a minute. Netscape mailers may suck but they aren't *that* idiotic. I've only used Netscape mail for outgoing messages via web links. Can someone let me know if there is an easy fix for this? Like a preference setting or other menu setting that toggles header accessability. I'd go play in Netscape myself but the stupid thing crashes my computer every time I open it. Also (and partly to justify my posting this here instead of spending half an hour tracking down the "right" group :-)), what other mailers have similar problems? I've had complaints before from AOL users saying the header was too long or some such (despite most AOL'ers having no trouble with it). And I won't even get into MS mailer people and their mime mode/attachments as that is the rant for another post :). Btw, I have zero control over the authenitication message/structure except that I can turn it off entirely (which I won't do). Thanks, Cyndi -- _______________________________________________________________________________ "There's nothing wrong with me. Maybe there's Cyndi Norman something wrong with the universe." (ST:TNG) cnorman@best.com __________________________________________________ http://www.best.com/~cnorman From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 16 17:06:19 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id QAA22312 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 16 May 1997 16:24:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from colossus.arl.mil (colossus.arl.mil [131.218.204.98]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id QAA22254 for ; Fri, 16 May 1997 16:24:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [131.218.204.98] by colossus.arl.mil with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Fri, 16 May 1997 19:30:36 +0100 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Organization: Little to None X-Mailer: Eudora 3.0 for Cray Y-MP Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 19:28:11 +0100 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Vince Sabio Subject: Re: Auto-Bounce Handling Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk ** Sometime around 8:37 AM -0400 5/14/97, Brock Rozen said: >Hi, > >Does anybody know of any programs that handle bounces on a UNIX platform? Hi Brock, Sorry for the delay, but I've been out of town for a week. Anyway, the Unix port for SmartBounce is nearly out of beta (well, it depends on whether I'm going to implement one really important wish-list item in the current release, or save it for the upgrade; still waffling there). You can get all the details on the app from the web page: Enjoy ... - Vince S. wavelet@colossus.arl.mil HumourNet: Anyone w/o a sense of humor is at the mercy of the rest of us. From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 16 17:12:29 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id QAA24969 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 16 May 1997 16:35:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.his.com (mail.his.com [205.177.25.9]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id QAA24950 for ; Fri, 16 May 1997 16:35:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.177.25.174] (brad.his.com [205.177.25.174]) by mail.his.com (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id TAA04755; Fri, 16 May 1997 19:36:50 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199705141526.PAA16195@sundial.MIT.EDU.MIT.EDU> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 19:33:02 -0400 To: rlcarr@MIT.EDU, list-managers-digest@GreatCircle.COM From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: check_mail ruleset for sendmail.cf Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 11:26 AM -0400 5/14/97, rlcarr@MIT.EDU wrote: >So, under anti-spam measures like the check_mail ruleset, will mail >from my home machine be bounced because "homemachine.isp.net" cannot >be resolved (if you try to ping it you'll get "unknown host"), or will >it be accepted because "isp.net" is a valid domain, or will it be accepted >because my UUCP feed provides an MX record for homemachine.isp.net ? If your service provider has an MX record for homemachine.isp.net, and that's the domain you put on the envelope sender addresses for all your outbound mail, you should be fine. However, these questions are not appropriate for this list. Instead, you should be sending them to sendmail-questions@sendmail.org. -- Brad Knowles comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer Emeritus From owner-list-managers-outgoing Sat May 17 06:42:20 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id GAA02786 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 17 May 1997 06:38:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from webster.m-w.com ([206.98.43.4]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id GAA02779 for ; Sat, 17 May 1997 06:38:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by m-w.com (NeXT-1.0 (From Sendmail 5.52)/NeXT-2.0) id AA08612; Sat, 17 May 97 09:26:31 EDT Date: Sat, 17 May 97 09:26:31 EDT From: awest@webster.m-w.com (Amy West) Message-Id: <9705171326.AA08612@m-w.com> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: TAN: spam that encourages spam Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk This should actually be sent to some abuse list, but I'm not yet subscribed to any, so anyone who is should feel free to send this on. I've already sent a nasty note to the postmaster. But, boy, this is really offensive: it's spam that encourages the recipients to pay someone to spam! ---Amy West Mail Admin Merriam-Webster Inc. Return-Path: Date: Fri, 16 May 97 00:24:32 EDT To: On-Line-Users@quantcom.com From: usa@quantcom.com Subject: GET $TRAFFIC$ TO YOUR WEBSITE $SALES$ FOR YOUR BUSINESS Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit EMAIL USA Mass E-Mail Discount Program *************************************************** Advertise your Business or Website , with our Mass e-mail program. Fast * Affordable * Very Effective EMail USA will send out your message to a vast amount of potential customers in one day. Even if your website is in the top 10 you can't get the traffic that you would as if you targeted everyone that sees your ad. Why is our bulk e-mail program so effective? Our bulk e-mail service provides businesses & individuals the most inexpensive, and most effective way to reach millions of people over the internet. We currently have over 12 million addresses to offer, and counting. *******Special Offers******* Send your ad to 100,000 people for only $100 Send your ad to 225,000 people for only $200 ****Lowest prices guaranteed**** Special discounts for larger runs. For more info on advertising with EMail USA please go to our website at www.mass-email.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * This is the only message that you will receive. Your name will be automatically removed from our database. From owner-list-managers-outgoing Sat May 17 19:43:15 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id TAA11297 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 17 May 1997 19:31:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from miles.greatcircle.com (miles.greatcircle.com [198.102.244.34]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id TAA11290 for ; Sat, 17 May 1997 19:31:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from duticai.twi.tudelft.nl (duticai.twi.tudelft.nl [130.161.159.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Miles-970308-2) with ESMTP id TAA20321 for ; Sat, 17 May 1997 19:33:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from winfave@localhost) by duticai.twi.tudelft.nl (8.8.5/8.8.5) id AAA00363; Sun, 18 May 1997 00:34:36 +0200 (MET DST) From: Alexander Verbraeck Message-Id: <199705172234.AAA00363@duticai.twi.tudelft.nl> Subject: Additions for ignored-list To: List-Managers@greatcircle.com Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 00:34:35 +0200 (MET DST) Cc: orionsoft@telephonet.com, winfave@duticai.twi.tudelft.nl X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] Content-Type: text Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Here are the recent additions for phony subscriptions and "info" requests that were caught by my spam filter for the lists I maintain. For those of you who do not filter out phony subscriptions: check for these users in your subscription list and they probably need to be removed. You can also add them to your ".ignored" file, but the same addresses seldomly are used again. "Manuel A. Ilme" 71112.1620@compuserve.com andrewr@earthfriends.com aomi_europe@usa.net bambi@207.247.16.217 CGSI@anv.net CMJENTP@aol.com Damon@nmsystms.com dave@thielen.com ehrhart@mindspring.com flashback@pen.net FONINFO@aol.com gonzo@one.net innovation@savetrees.com interwave@bluehawk.com itslasvegas@bluehawk.com jamesc@msni.net maddison@ihug.co.nz mainegal@megalink.net MPETER@AOL.COM raveswarm@hotmail.com RICKMAC@swbell.net Strzempko@aol.com travelamerica@bluehawk.com tret@krg.com waters@halcyon.com Kind regards, Alexander Vebraeck List Manager BPR-L, DYNMOD-L ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dr. Alexander Verbraeck Delft University of Technology Department of Systems Engineering, Policy Analysis and Management Jaffalaan 5 P.O. Box 5015, 2600 GA Delft The Netherlands Tel: +31 15 2783805 Secr: +31 15 2788380 Fax: +31 15 2783429 e-mail: A.Verbraeck@sepa.tudelft.nl List manager BPR-L, DYNMOD-L http://www.sepa.tudelft.nl/~alexandv/ See also ..../bpr-l.html ----------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-list-managers-outgoing Sat May 17 20:43:23 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id UAA13182 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 17 May 1997 20:35:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.wasatch.com (ns.wasatch.com [204.99.129.2]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id UAA13173 for ; Sat, 17 May 1997 20:35:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <337E871F.7458@wasatch.com> Date: Sat, 17 May 1997 21:35:43 -0700 From: "W. David Samuelsen" Reply-To: "W. David Samuelsen" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: List-Managers@greatcircle.com CC: A.Verbraeck@IS.TWI.TUDelft.NL Subject: re: Additions for ignored-list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk How interesting! > ehrhart@mindspring.com Of hundreds of subscribers, this one was the constant in every list I own. Never post any message to any genealogical list. (The Maiser of Iindiana University crashed Friday May 10th, shutting down 1,001 lists) Added interesting note: mindsprings.com is based in Atlanta, Georgia. Source of the spam that killed Maiser. Mindsprings.com is good company where the spammer is using it. earthfriends.com and savetrees.com are two pieces of Cyberpromo.com web. From owner-list-managers-outgoing Sat May 17 21:13:19 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id VAA14406 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 17 May 1997 21:01:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ginger.vnet.net (ginger.vnet.net [166.82.1.69]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id VAA14368 for ; Sat, 17 May 1997 21:01:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from katie.vnet.net (murr@katie.vnet.net [166.82.1.7]) by ginger.vnet.net (8.8.5/8.8.2) with ESMTP id AAA29691 for ; Sun, 18 May 1997 00:02:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA00659 for ; Sun, 18 May 1997 00:01:55 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: katie.vnet.net: murr owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 00:01:54 -0400 (EDT) From: murr rhame To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: re: Additions for ignored-list In-Reply-To: <337E871F.7458@wasatch.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk This one just came in a few minutes before midnight eastern: naked@webpics.com Probably another attempt to spam a spammer. - murr - From owner-list-managers-outgoing Sun May 18 04:28:11 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id EAA29076 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 18 May 1997 04:14:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cais.cais.com (cais.com [199.0.216.4]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id EAA29069 for ; Sun, 18 May 1997 04:14:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cyberfam.cais.com.cais.com (cyberfam.cais.com [207.176.65.70]) by cais.cais.com (8.8.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA12040; Sun, 18 May 1997 07:14:55 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19970517230702.0069ec14@cais.com> X-Sender: cyberfam@cais.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Sat, 17 May 1997 23:07:02 -0400 To: Alexander Verbraeck From: Allison & Rick Martin Subject: Re: Additions for ignored-list Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <199705172234.AAA00363@duticai.twi.tudelft.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk We've had them all. Thanks for the list - I'll send it on to our ISP in hopes they will think again about upgrading the software. By the way, here's one I just caught - these people must be desperate for business. "naked@webpics.com has been added to your list. No action is required on your part." At 12:34 AM 5/18/97 +0200, Alexander Verbraeck wrote: >Here are the recent additions for phony subscriptions and "info" requests >that were caught by my spam filter for the lists I maintain. For those >of you who do not filter out phony subscriptions: check for these users >in your subscription list and they probably need to be removed. You can >also add them to your ".ignored" file, but the same addresses seldomly >are used again. > >"Manuel A. Ilme" >71112.1620@compuserve.com >andrewr@earthfriends.com >aomi_europe@usa.net >bambi@207.247.16.217 >CGSI@anv.net >CMJENTP@aol.com >Damon@nmsystms.com >dave@thielen.com >ehrhart@mindspring.com >flashback@pen.net >FONINFO@aol.com >gonzo@one.net >innovation@savetrees.com >interwave@bluehawk.com >itslasvegas@bluehawk.com >jamesc@msni.net >maddison@ihug.co.nz >mainegal@megalink.net >MPETER@AOL.COM >raveswarm@hotmail.com >RICKMAC@swbell.net >Strzempko@aol.com >travelamerica@bluehawk.com >tret@krg.com >waters@halcyon.com > >Kind regards, >Alexander Vebraeck >List Manager BPR-L, DYNMOD-L > >----------------------------------------------------------------- >Dr. Alexander Verbraeck Delft University of Technology >Department of Systems Engineering, Policy Analysis and Management >Jaffalaan 5 P.O. Box 5015, 2600 GA Delft The Netherlands >Tel: +31 15 2783805 Secr: +31 15 2788380 Fax: +31 15 2783429 >e-mail: A.Verbraeck@sepa.tudelft.nl List manager BPR-L, DYNMOD-L >http://www.sepa.tudelft.nl/~alexandv/ See also ..../bpr-l.html >----------------------------------------------------------------- > From owner-list-managers-outgoing Sun May 18 19:28:22 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id TAA02467 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 18 May 1997 19:16:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ec2.earthchannel.com (ec2.earthchannel.com [205.160.21.65]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id TAA02460 for ; Sun, 18 May 1997 19:15:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ec12.earthchannel.com (unverified [205.160.21.75]) by ec3.earthchannel.com (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.83) with SMTP id ; Sun, 18 May 1997 22:15:24 -0400 Message-ID: Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Gess Shankar" Organization: Earth Channel Communications LLC To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 22:11:44 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: A new source of unsolicited email Reply-to: gess@earthchannel.com X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.53/R1) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Well, it appears we have yet another problem. This time it is a resume mailing service. It claims it is sent anonymously to protect the job seeker from email abuse! And yet, they think it is perfectly okay to spam mailing lists and apparently even servers. Is this really coming from AOL? Bounces to Nolemail@aol.com come back with "mailbox full" errors. I have received a few copies of this nonsense as a subscriber to other mailing lists. It got filtered out from my lists because only subscribers can post to the lists. Gess gess@earthchannel.com ---- Headers from one such as follows: <---------------- cut here -----------------> Received: from emout17.mail.aol.com (unverified [198.81.11.43]) by ec3.earthchannel.com with SMTP id ; Sun, 18 May 1997 20:36:59 -0400 Received: (from root@localhost) by emout17.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0) id UAA04317; Sun, 18 May 1997 20:05:27 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 20:05:27 -0400 (EDT) From: Nolemail@aol.com Message-ID: <970518200525_-2101985309@emout17.mail.aol.com> To: SaltRide@aol.com Subject: 33852 Dear Madam or Sir, I am currently seeking employment with your company and am available immediately. I have provided my resume, so that you have the opportunity to NOTE: This message has been sent to you anonymously. If you wish to reply to this resume with an offer of employment, please do so via the contact information provided on the resume itself. This service has been deployed to protect job seekers from potential email abuse. <------------ cut here -----------> From owner-list-managers-outgoing Mon May 19 08:43:27 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id IAA12795 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 19 May 1997 08:31:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from laird.com (hardy.laird.com [207.149.56.33]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id IAA12780 for ; Mon, 19 May 1997 08:30:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199705191530.IAA12780@honor.greatcircle.com> Received: (qmail 11932 invoked from smtpd); 19 May 1997 15:31:47 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO hardy.laird.com) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 19 May 1997 15:31:47 -0000 To: gess@earthchannel.com cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: A new source of unsolicited email In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 18 May 1997 22:11:44 CDT." From: scott@laird.com (Scott Laird) Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 08:31:47 -0700 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message , "Gess Shankar" writes: > >Well, it appears we have yet another problem. This time it is a resume >mailing service. It claims it is sent anonymously to protect the job >seeker from email abuse! And yet, they think it is perfectly okay to >spam mailing lists and apparently even servers. > >Is this really coming from AOL? Bounces to Nolemail@aol.com come back >with "mailbox full" errors. > >I have received a few copies of this nonsense as a subscriber to other >mailing lists. It got filtered out from my lists because only >subscribers can post to the lists. AOL's already dealt with them. I got the following response: The individual in question has been actioned, and won't be causing us anymore trouble. I wish I could be more specific, but privacy restrictions would prohibit me from telling you if I had canceled her account so hard that her modem broke. You know, I'm starting to *like* AOL. At least they deal with their spammers. Scott From owner-list-managers-outgoing Mon May 19 15:14:27 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id PAA29956 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 19 May 1997 15:12:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tardis.Tymnet.COM (tardis.tymnet.com [131.146.3.15]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id PAA29949 for ; Mon, 19 May 1997 15:12:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from jms@localhost) by tardis.Tymnet.COM (8.8.5/8.8.5) id OAA22588; Mon, 19 May 1997 14:34:05 -0700 (PDT) From: Joe Smith Message-Id: <199705192134.OAA22588@tardis.Tymnet.COM> Subject: Re: Netscape mail and headers To: cnorman@best.com Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 14:34:04 -0700 (PDT) Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: <199705161825.LAA15145@shellx.best.com> from "Cyndi Norman" at May 16, 97 11:25:35 am 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 Cyndi Norman (cnorman@best.com) wrote: > I've just recieved my second complaint from a potential subscriber that the > Netscape mailer will not allow them to edit the subject header. Netscape does allow the Subject field to be edited. However, there are some net surfers that are totally clueless about lines of text that are wider than the text entry box. These people haven't learned about the HOME and END keys. If the subject line is very long (such as from bestserv), the word REJECT is not visible. The user needs to know how to click once on the subject line, and then press and hold the right arrow key or press the END key until the end of the Subject line is visible. Then hit backspace 6 times and enter ACCEPT. HOME and END work in the Windows and UNIX versions of Netscape, I assume the Mac does the same. -Joe From owner-list-managers-outgoing Mon May 19 15:56:03 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id PAA03026 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 19 May 1997 15:32:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id PAA02967 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 19 May 1997 15:31:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sol.traken.com (traken.com [206.26.158.155]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id VAA16010 for ; Sat, 17 May 1997 21:40:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from venus.traken.com ([192.168.2.12]) by sol.traken.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with ESMTP id AAA01879 for ; Sun, 18 May 1997 00:34:06 GMT Message-Id: <199705180034.AAA01879@sol.traken.com> Reply-To: From: "Darryl L. Pierce" To: Subject: All members ignored but one? Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 00:40:45 -0400 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1161 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I recently started seeing a strange problem with Majordomo: A few days ago (Thursday), when email is sent to my mailing list, Majordomo sends only a single copy of the email. It's going to vacppwin@vnet.ibm.com. Nobody else in the list receives email. And, what's worse, the above address *isn't* in the mailing list. How do you track down the entry that's causing the problem? I've had problems with the ibm.* domains (ibm.net is the main offender). Nobody is in the ibm.com domain on my list.. Please respond via email to me as I'm not currently active in the Majordomo mailing lists... --- Darryl L. Pierce (mailto:keeper@sol.traken.com) Visit my website, http://www.traken.com/~keeper To send email, remove "spamfree" from my address. "Neither Heaven nor Hell...will be found in the tail of a comet." - Harlan Ellison From owner-list-managers-outgoing Mon May 19 15:58:31 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id PAA05941 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 19 May 1997 15:54:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from colossus.arl.mil (colossus.arl.mil [131.218.204.98]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id PAA05920 for ; Mon, 19 May 1997 15:54:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [131.218.204.98] by colossus.arl.mil with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Mon, 19 May 1997 19:00:21 +0100 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199705192134.OAA22588@tardis.Tymnet.COM> References: <199705161825.LAA15145@shellx.best.com> from "Cyndi Norman" at May 16, 97 11:25:35 am Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Organization: Little to None X-Mailer: Eudora 3.0 for Cray Y-MP Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 19:00:05 +0100 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Vince Sabio Subject: Re: Netscape mail and headers Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk ** Sometime around 2:34 PM -0700 5/19/97, Joe Smith said: >If the subject line is very long (such as from bestserv), the word REJECT is >not visible. The user needs to know how to click once on the subject line, >and then press and hold the right arrow key or press the END key until the end >of the Subject line is visible. Then hit backspace 6 times and enter ACCEPT. > >HOME and END work in the Windows and UNIX versions of Netscape, I assume >the Mac does the same. Just FYI: Yes, it does function the same way on the Mac. ___________________________________________________________________________ - Vince Sabio Support the anti-spam amendment -- wavelet@colossus.arl.mil join CAUCE: From owner-list-managers-outgoing Mon May 19 21:59:36 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id VAA25065 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 19 May 1997 21:44:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.his.com (mail.his.com [205.177.25.9]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id VAA25021 for ; Mon, 19 May 1997 21:44:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [205.177.25.174] (brad.his.com [205.177.25.174]) by mail.his.com (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id AAA25265; Tue, 20 May 1997 00:45:38 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 23:48:45 -0400 To: gess@earthchannel.com, list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: A new source of unsolicited email Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 11:11 PM -0400 5/18/97, Gess Shankar wrote: >Well, it appears we have yet another problem. This time it is a >resume mailing service. It claims it is sent anonymously to protect >the job seeker from email abuse! And yet, they think it is perfectly >okay to spam mailing lists and apparently even servers. > >Is this really coming from AOL? Bounces to Nolemail@aol.com come back with >"mailbox full" errors. Yup, it's real. I recognize that IP address (assuming that ec3.earthchannel.com isn't lying or faked as well). Forward the original to abuse@aol.com, and they'll deal with this luser. -- Brad Knowles comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer Emeritus From owner-list-managers-outgoing Tue May 20 10:14:41 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id KAA10919 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 20 May 1997 10:10:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from colossus.arl.mil (colossus.arl.mil [131.218.204.98]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id KAA10858 for ; Tue, 20 May 1997 10:10:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [131.218.204.98] by colossus.arl.mil with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Tue, 20 May 1997 13:16:21 +0100 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Organization: Little to None X-Mailer: Eudora 3.0 for Cray Y-MP Date: Tue, 20 May 1997 13:15:58 +0100 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Vince Sabio Subject: Re: A new source of unsolicited email Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk ** Sometime around 11:48 PM -0400 5/19/97, Brad Knowles said: >>Well, it appears we have yet another problem. This time it is a >>resume mailing service. It claims it is sent anonymously to protect >>the job seeker from email abuse! And yet, they think it is perfectly >>okay to spam mailing lists and apparently even servers. >> >>Is this really coming from AOL? Bounces to Nolemail@aol.com come back with >>"mailbox full" errors. > > Yup, it's real. I recognize that IP address (assuming that >ec3.earthchannel.com isn't lying or faked as well). No need to; I received [AOL's version of] confirmation that account was nuked within two hours of my receiving the spam and filing the complaint. > Forward the original to abuse@aol.com, and they'll deal with this luser. BTW, AOL complaints go to abuse@aol.net, IIRC. At least, that's where I ^^^ sent my complaint, and the response was very swift. We can complain about AOL on a lot of fronts, but they are VERY good about slapping down spammers. - Vince Sabio orionsoft@telephonet.com -- If you run a mailing list and are tired of manually processing mail bounces, then you probably need SmartBounce -- currently managing mailing lists in excess of 150,000 subscribers. For more information, send a blank email to or visit . -- From owner-list-managers-outgoing Wed May 21 07:00:59 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id GAA24084 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 21 May 1997 06:40:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eagle.inetnebr.com (eagle.inetnebr.com [199.184.119.14]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id GAA24075 for ; Wed, 21 May 1997 06:40:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from carrot.tssi.com (root@gateway.tssi.com [198.147.197.29]) by eagle.inetnebr.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA04296 for ; Wed, 21 May 1997 08:40:54 -0500 (CDT) Received: from celery.tssi.com (carrot.tssi.com) by carrot.tssi.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with ESMTP id IAA09775 for ; Wed, 21 May 1997 08:40:10 -0500 Received: (from celery.tssi.com) by celery.tssi.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id IAA05715 for list-managers@GreatCircle.com; Wed, 21 May 1997 08:39:51 -0500 From: Mike Nolan Message-Id: <199705211339.IAA05715@celery.tssi.com> Subject: Problem with MCI MAIL? To: list-managers@GreatCircle.com (List Managers) Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 08:39:51 -0500 (CDT) Reply-To: nolan@tssi.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 I've received complaints from two of my subscribers in the last week, both on MCI MAIL, that they are getting messages with blank bodies. It appears that my digest lists are working OK, but not the undigested ones. Has anyone else run across this one, and is there anything I can do at this end to improve the situation? If not, how do I contact MCI MAIL to ask them to look into the situation? -- Mike Nolan nolan@tssi.com From owner-list-managers-outgoing Wed May 21 07:47:29 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id HAA29980 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 21 May 1997 07:43:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eagle.inetnebr.com (eagle.inetnebr.com [199.184.119.14]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id HAA29844 for ; Wed, 21 May 1997 07:42:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from carrot.tssi.com (root@gateway.tssi.com [198.147.197.29]) by eagle.inetnebr.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA06594 for ; Wed, 21 May 1997 09:43:55 -0500 (CDT) Received: from celery.tssi.com (carrot.tssi.com) by carrot.tssi.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with ESMTP id JAA10867 for ; Wed, 21 May 1997 09:43:53 -0500 Received: (from celery.tssi.com) by celery.tssi.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA09506 for list-managers@GreatCircle.com; Wed, 21 May 1997 09:43:53 -0500 From: Mike Nolan Message-Id: <199705211443.JAA09506@celery.tssi.com> Subject: More details on MCI problem To: list-managers@GreatCircle.com (List Managers) Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 09:43:53 -0500 (CDT) Reply-To: nolan@tssi.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 Here's what my MCI MAIL subscriber wrote me about the problem he's having with MCI MAIL > posts to the list are still coming through 'corrupted' -- the > addressing is screwed up 'multiple addresses suppressed by mcimail', > and a null text block. > > if you can, find out from your other mci client(s) if mci has recently > activated a new mailgate servicing their account(s). this is > apprently what they did in the albany area on 4/26 (the day my > problems started) but they only told us about it late last week. -- Mike Nolan From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 23 13:56:07 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id NAA01615 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 23 May 1997 13:09:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id NAA01600 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Fri, 23 May 1997 13:09:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from CGNET.COM (CGNET.COM [192.156.137.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id HAA23523 for ; Tue, 20 May 1997 07:59:28 -0700 (PDT) From: P.KRISTENSEN@conservation.org Received: from ccmail.cgnet.com by CGNET.COM (PMDF V4.3-9 #18290) id <01IJ331F281C009M6T@CGNET.COM>; Tue, 20 May 1997 08:00:19 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 20 May 1997 10:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: List Tracking Software? To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Message-id: <01IJ332E5URY009M6T@CGNET.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I am relatively new to this list, so forgive me if my question has been asked before. I am looking for a software to run on my PC on Win95 which can 1) help me me keep track of which lists I am currently subscribed to 2) easy and simple can send "unsubscribe" or "pause" commands, while on travel with my laptop. I save copies of the welcome message, and mark with an asterisk in a spreadsheet the lists I currently subscrib to. But there must be something more practical out there. I was searching on the Shareware sites for something but without luck. Any suggestions? Thanks, Peter Kristensen. From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 23 14:10:08 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id NAA02248 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 23 May 1997 13:13:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id NAA02233 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Fri, 23 May 1997 13:13:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from europe.std.com (europe.std.com [199.172.62.20]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id JAA16149 for ; Wed, 21 May 1997 09:11:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from world.std.com by europe.std.com (8.7.6/BZS-8-1.0) id MAA25458; Wed, 21 May 1997 12:12:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: by world.std.com (5.65c/Spike-2.0) id AA11140; Wed, 21 May 1997 12:12:53 -0400 Message-Id: <199705211612.AA11140@world.std.com> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Should I Moderate List to Avert Flaming (Suggestions and Hints Requested) Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 12:12:52 -0400 From: Rick Umali Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hello: I read the thread "Threats from an unsubscribed list member" with great interest. I run a Tiger Woods mailing list. It is starting to devolve into individuals calling for certain members of the list to be "kicked off". One member is claiming that bad email sent to him by a list member means that that member should be kicked off, but I don't see any postings to the list from this person. Anyway, I've tried to ignore such proceedings, but lately the members have been calling for me to act. One tactic I wanted to try was moderating the list (approving each post before sending it to the other list members). Q: Is switching the list from unmoderated to moderated a good tactic to "calm the waters"? Q: Has anyone gone from unmoderated, to moderated? Has anyone gone from moderated to unmoderated? In the meantime, I'll take up the suggestion to post up a list of "netiquette". Rick (rgu@world.std.com) Umali Arlington, Massachusetts "I got the black cat bone and I got a mojo, too." http://world.std.com/~rgu/tigerwoods/ From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 23 17:14:55 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id QAA02607 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 23 May 1997 16:25:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from garcon.unicom.com (garcon.unicom.com [192.108.105.37]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id QAA02542 for ; Fri, 23 May 1997 16:25:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from chip@localhost) by garcon.unicom.com (8.8.4/8.8.4) id SAA02867; Fri, 23 May 1997 18:27:11 -0500 (CDT) From: Chip Rosenthal Message-Id: <199705232327.SAA02867@garcon.unicom.com> Subject: Re: Should I Moderate List to Avert Flaming (Suggestions and Hints Requested) To: rgu@world.std.com (Rick Umali) Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 18:27:10 -0500 (CDT) Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <199705211612.AA11140@world.std.com> from "Rick Umali" at May 21, 1997 12:12:52 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL0b1] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Rick Umali writes: > Q: Is switching the list from unmoderated to moderated a > good tactic to "calm the waters"? My experience is that the mere threat often is enough to knock everybody back to their senses. -- Chip Rosenthal * Unicom Systems Development * http://www.unicom.com/ Junk email is theft - there ought to be a law * http://www.cauce.org/ From owner-list-managers-outgoing Sat May 24 03:44:05 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id DAA14259 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 24 May 1997 03:34:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lowdown.com (lowdown.com [207.99.13.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id DAA14237 for ; Sat, 24 May 1997 03:34:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ppp60.lowdown.com (ppp60.lowdown.com [207.99.13.60]) by lowdown.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id GAA00855 for ; Sat, 24 May 1997 06:36:14 -0400 Received: by ppp60.lowdown.com with Microsoft Mail id <01BC680C.BDD6D2C0@ppp60.lowdown.com>; Sat, 24 May 1997 06:35:59 -0400 Message-ID: <01BC680C.BDD6D2C0@ppp60.lowdown.com> From: Scott Matthew Quitadamo To: "List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM" Subject: RE: Should I Moderate List to Avert Flaming (Suggestions and Hints Requested) Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 06:34:45 -0400 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Good point, recently we underwent the return of a loose cannon who seemed to genuinely want to begin making contributions "on topic", but his first post included thanking the list admin for steering a few "names" in the proper direction. This naming of names infuriated a few individuals. His farewell of a few months ago was absolutely profane and his recent return (albeit content laden) was greeted with a multi-paragraphed bashing. My attempts to quiet the furor were fruitless until I took a overcompensating, strongly worded approach. Although I took a lot of heat, the aggression was diverted from the loose cannon for a moment. Publicly threatening to ban several (unnamed) members was extreme, but I have a feeling most wanted to avoid becoming a victim and subsequently stopped posting trash to the list. Of all the list wars I have seen here in the last year, this was the shortest lived. At this point, we are considering publishing a daily moderated digest in addition to the regular minute by minute distribution. I think the advantages to having a second format will be that the "hardcore members" will have the content-only format they desire, and it eliminates the need to subscribe to both lists. Posting will continue through the original list address. Does anyone have experience setting up this sort of format? How much more work (aside from filtering the incoming mail manually) is involved. And how complex is setting up this type of format? Thanks. Scott ---------- From: Chip Rosenthal[SMTP:chip@unicom.com] Sent: Friday, May 23, 1997 2:27 PM To: Rick Umali Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Should I Moderate List to Avert Flaming (Suggestions and Hints Requested) Rick Umali writes: > Q: Is switching the list from unmoderated to moderated a > good tactic to "calm the waters"? My experience is that the mere threat often is enough to knock everybody back to their senses. -- Chip Rosenthal * Unicom Systems Development * http://www.unicom.com/ Junk email is theft - there ought to be a law * http://www.cauce.org/ From owner-list-managers-outgoing Sat May 24 06:44:06 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id GAA05288 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 24 May 1997 06:22:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nntp.cs.ubc.ca (nntp.cs.ubc.ca [142.103.6.16]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id GAA05241 for ; Sat, 24 May 1997 06:22:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cs.ubc.ca (uucp@news.cs.ubc.ca [142.103.6.2]) by nntp.cs.ubc.ca (8.8.5/8.6.9) with ESMTP id GAA11951 for ; Sat, 24 May 1997 06:25:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by cs.ubc.ca (8.8.5/8.6.9) id GAA27182 for List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM; Sat, 24 May 1997 06:23:58 -0700 (PDT) >Received: from mornir.gweep.bc.ca by edmonds.home.cs.ubc.ca (Sendmail 8.7.5) with ESMTP id GAA16963; Sat, 24 May 1997 06:18:51 -0700 Received: from cs.ubc.ca by nnrp.cs.ubc.ca; Sat, 24 May 1997 06:23 PDT Received: from mornir.gweep.bc.ca by edmonds.home.cs.ubc.ca (Sendmail 8.7.5) with ESMTP id GAA16963; Sat, 24 May 1997 06:18:51 -0700 Received: (from edmonds@localhost) by mornir.gweep.bc.ca (8.8.5/8.8.5) id GAA01387; Sat, 24 May 1997 06:18:40 -0700 To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Should I Moderate List to Avert Flaming (Suggestions and Hints Requested) X-Operating-System: Linux 2.0.29 #1 Wed Mar 19 20:11:02 PST 1997 X-Geek: http://www.cs.ubc.ca/spider/edmonds/doc/geek.html X-Homepage: http://www.cs.ubc.ca/spider/edmonds X-PGP-Ox6E86B769: This key is obsolete, please discard it. X-PGP-Ox979D0B09: A9 3E 1E CB 86 09 B1 E9 3C 1A 0E F6 49 F9 5D 99 Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106) From: edmonds@cs.ubc.ca (Brian Edmonds) Date: 24 May 1997 06:18:40 -0700 In-Reply-To: Rick Umali's message of Wed, 21 May 1997 12:12:52 -0400 Message-ID: <37k9kpnh3j.fsf@mornir.gweep.bc.ca> Lines: 19 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.52/XEmacs 20.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Rick Umali writes: > Q: Is switching the list from unmoderated to moderated a good tactic > to "calm the waters"? I find it works well on one of the lists I run that descends into flame wars from time to time. After a week or two people forget about whatever they were so concerned with, and I switch back to unmod. I announced it the first time or two, but these days I just do it quietly if I feel it's necessary. The list members now know well that if they stay reasonably on topic there's no problem, but off-topic material may just vanish in the ether if they've crossed my idiot threshold. > In the meantime, I'll take up the suggestion to post up a list of > "netiquette". Feel free to include pointers to mine: Brian. From owner-list-managers-outgoing Sat May 24 09:29:08 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id JAA28935 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 24 May 1997 09:19:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost.azstarnet.com (mailhost.azstarnet.com [169.197.1.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id JAA28918 for ; Sat, 24 May 1997 09:19:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p166 (usr7ip61.azstarnet.com [169.197.8.61]) by mailhost.azstarnet.com (8.8.3-p/8.8.5) with SMTP id JAA23208 for ; Sat, 24 May 1997 09:21:22 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <199705241621.JAA23208@mailhost.azstarnet.com> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Bob Bish" Organization: http://www.humvee.com To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 09:21:21 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Should I Moderate List to Avert Flaming Reply-to: bish@azstarnet.com In-reply-to: <199705240800.BAA05739@honor.greatcircle.com> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.52) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > I run a Tiger Woods mailing list. [snip] > One member is claiming that bad email sent to him by a list > member means that that member should be kicked off, but I > don't see any postings to the list from this person. If a member had something bad to say to another member, he/she did the right thing by doing so privately and not on the list. > Q: Is switching the list from unmoderated to moderated a > good tactic to "calm the waters"? Maybe, but you'd end up doing a lot of work. With Tiger Woods as the subject, a very popular fellow who is currently in the global spotlight, you may soon end up with a huge list. Once you have a few hundred members, moderating could prove impractical. Also, since Tiger Woods is a role model for youngsters, you're bound to end up with some young, immature people on your list. You should expect some rather immature postings from time to time. I run the Hummer Mailing List with over 500 members. The mature Hummer owners on the list often complain about the younger people who join and post things like "Will someone please give me a Hummer for free?" (a $50,000+ vehicle). They sometimes ask if I can screen out such people, but we have to take the bad with the good. ...Bob http://www.humvee.com From owner-list-managers-outgoing Sat May 24 11:29:05 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id LAA06070 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 24 May 1997 11:16:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dulce.mic.dundee.ac.uk (dulce.mic.dundee.ac.uk [134.36.34.9]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id LAA06051 for ; Sat, 24 May 1997 11:16:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from perle-4.mic.dundee.ac.uk by dulce.mic.dundee.ac.uk with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.0.1457.7) id LN0HA0B0; Sat, 24 May 1997 19:16:05 +0100 Received: by perle-4.mic.dundee.ac.uk with Microsoft Mail id <01BC6876.E6FB74C0@perle-4.mic.dundee.ac.uk>; Sat, 24 May 1997 19:15:55 +0100 Message-ID: <01BC6876.E6FB74C0@perle-4.mic.dundee.ac.uk> From: Andy C To: "'rgu@world.std.com'" Cc: "'List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM'" Subject: RE: Should I Moderate List to Avert Flaming Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 19:15:11 +0100 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk You guys are lucky, I run a Forteana list with about 300 members, and about 50 very vocal members. Unfortunately the vocal elements of the list is roughly split in two, those that want more idle chat and those that want less chat more hard core Forteana. Sadly every three months or so one group will turn on the other and a flame war will ensue. The last time this happened I turned the default reply option from "mail to list" to "mail to sender". The flame war stopped quickly, after a few days later I turned it back to "mail to list" and all was well for at least three months. The whole situation is exasperated because the nature of the subject tends to attract unconventional personalities, its hard to turn them away because some have real contributions to make. Moderation is not an option because: 1: Its a very fast moving field, items in the news can often need debate quickly. For instance during the recent Heavens Gate suicide tragedy the list members had identified the culprits a good 24 hours before the media. 2: Because we debate the unusual any moderator could be accused of imposing his/her world view on the list. Again for instance recently some one joined the list specifically to put the view that AIDS did not really exist. A moderator may well have been tempted to block this post as potential flame bait and even bordering on the offensive. However the list members quickly joined together in sensible debate to point the errors in the initial argument. As you can see have not yet managed to resolve the situation, but I would suggest 1: Review your "mail to policy" 2: Make sure your introductory message has some idea of the bounds of the list. 3: Threaten to remove the offending members, even if its only for a week. Do not give in to threats, if you are threatened leave them off the list for longer. 4: Mail the offenders individually pointing out the errors of their ways. I usually send different messages to each side, taking a different tack to appeal to that sides point of view. Hope this is of some help. Andy C (BTW Forteana comes from Charles Fort who wrote the "Book of the Damned" this concerns data that science ignores, consequently UFO's, Ghosts, and all manner of strange phenomena are fair game for discussion) From owner-list-managers-outgoing Sat May 24 13:29:28 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id NAA20608 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 24 May 1997 13:16:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from plaidworks.com (plaidworks.com [207.167.80.66]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id NAA20591 for ; Sat, 24 May 1997 13:16:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [207.167.80.70] (zamboni.plaidworks.com [207.167.80.70]) by plaidworks.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA03261; Sat, 24 May 1997 13:19:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <01BC6876.E6FB74C0@perle-4.mic.dundee.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 13:19:37 -0700 To: Andy C , "'rgu@world.std.com'" From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: RE: Should I Moderate List to Avert Flaming Cc: "'List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM'" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 11:15 AM -0700 5/24/97, Andy C wrote: >Unfortunately the vocal elements of the list is roughly >split in two, those that want more idle chat and those that want less >chat more >hard core Forteana. Have you considered two lists? One for core discussions and one for side discussions? If the topics can be split fairly objectively, this sort of thing works nicely (we do it with some of our hockey lists, with a "game/team only" list, and a "chat" list for other aspects of the team. . Sadly every three months or so one group will turn on the >other and a flame war will ensue. This is why I always have a "don't play list mom, dammit" rule in my rules. Because when people start this up, I step in and tell them all to shut up, to contact me iwth problems privately, and let *me* deal with it. And those that won't -- get tossed, like anyone who won't follow the rules. By making it clear from the start that problems come to me and I deal wtih them, I can generally keep things under control, and I keep one (or a small group) of users from dictacting policy behind my back. I had a problem this week on one list where a guy posted something *with my permisstion*, since he wasn't sure if it was appropriate, and one user decided to step in and tell him he shouldn't be doing things like that. By the time I stepped in, that one guy had generated 15 posts in a back-and-forth fight over this, and couldn't understand why I was upset at him for doing this to the list.... Sigh. But if you make sure that it's clear *you* run things and people who have problems come to *you* to resolve them, you can step in and moderate and work towards compromises while minimizing these kinds of in-fights, and also have a rule to slap the yahoos who want to play control queen, and if necessary, kick them off the list... -- Chuq Von Rospach (chuq@apple.com) Apple IS&T Mail List Gnome Plaidworks Consulting (chuqui@plaidworks.com) ( +-+ The home for Hockey on the net) From owner-list-managers-outgoing Sun May 25 12:44:03 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id MAA01101 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 25 May 1997 12:35:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from grinch.whoville.leftbank.com (grinch.leftbank.com [139.167.128.2]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id MAA01088 for ; Sun, 25 May 1997 12:35:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zax.whoville.leftbank.com by grinch.whoville.leftbank.com via smtpd (for honor.greatcircle.com [198.102.244.44]) with SMTP; 25 May 1997 19:37:41 UT Received: (from nmehl@localhost) by zax.leftbank.com (8.7.5/8.7.3/LeftBank-1.1/http://www.leftbank.com/) id PAA05511; Sun, 25 May 1997 15:38:45 -0400 (EDT) From: "Nathan J. Mehl" Message-Id: <199705251938.PAA05511@zax.leftbank.com> Subject: Re: Should I Moderate List to Avert Flaming (Suggestions and Hints Requested) To: rgu@world.std.com (Rick Umali) Date: Sun, 25 May 1997 15:38:44 -0400 (EDT) Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <199705211612.AA11140@world.std.com> from "Rick Umali" at May 21, 97 12:12:52 pm X-Abby-Says: Nathan, you keep getting to be the first person who does things to me X-My-Minions: Took over Lunacon...and Minbar. 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 In the immortal words of Rick Umali: > Q: Is switching the list from unmoderated to moderated a > good tactic to "calm the waters"? Absolutely. Done it before, will likely do it again. Just be sure you're set to be able to approve posts in a timely fashion, otherwise people will get legitamately ticked off that no posts at all are going through. You might wish to see if you can have somebody volunteer to help with the moderation chores. -n -- Don't blame me -- I voted for the Unabomber! Nathan J. Mehl -- The Left Bank Operation (work) nmehl@leftbank.com -- http://www.leftbank.com (play) memory@blank.org -- http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/nmehl/ From owner-list-managers-outgoing Mon May 26 05:44:13 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id FAA23424 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 26 May 1997 05:32:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from elvis.vnet.net (elvis.vnet.net [166.82.1.5]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id FAA23397 for ; Mon, 26 May 1997 05:32:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from katie.vnet.net (murr@katie.vnet.net [166.82.1.7]) by elvis.vnet.net (8.8.5/8.8.4) with ESMTP id IAA03839 for ; Mon, 26 May 1997 08:34:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA22614 for ; Mon, 26 May 1997 08:34:51 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: katie.vnet.net: murr owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 08:34:50 -0400 (EDT) From: murr rhame To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: More New Fakes In-Reply-To: <199705211612.AA11140@world.std.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk These two forgeries came in Sunday night / Monday morning. Too bad the listowners list is running so slowing. Could be old news by the time this is distributed. babas@mbox.vol.it babas@tin.it - murr - From owner-list-managers-outgoing Mon May 26 06:59:27 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id GAA04850 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 26 May 1997 06:58:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from elvis.vnet.net (elvis.vnet.net [166.82.1.5]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id GAA04835 for ; Mon, 26 May 1997 06:58:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from katie.vnet.net (murr@katie.vnet.net [166.82.1.7]) by elvis.vnet.net (8.8.5/8.8.4) with ESMTP id KAA08031 for ; Mon, 26 May 1997 10:00:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA23761 for ; Mon, 26 May 1997 10:00:15 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: katie.vnet.net: murr owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 10:00:10 -0400 (EDT) From: murr rhame To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: More New Fakes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Mon, 26 May 1997, murr rhame wrote: > These two forgeries came in Sunday night / Monday morning. Too bad > the listowners list is running so slowing. Could be old news by the > time this is distributed. > > babas@mbox.vol.it > babas@tin.it I had posted these addresses earlier but my post disappeared: aoltech012@juno.com user901165@aol.com alex5323@aol.com kiett@earthlink.com s540ltd@nwrain.com Seed_of_Hate@msn.com - murr - From owner-list-managers-outgoing Mon May 26 19:29:21 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id TAA05925 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 26 May 1997 19:27:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fellspt.charm.net (fellspt.charm.net [199.0.70.29]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id TAA05910 for ; Mon, 26 May 1997 19:27:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from bfant@localhost) by fellspt.charm.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) id WAA21471; Mon, 26 May 1997 22:29:44 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 22:29:44 -0400 (EDT) From: Bill Fant To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: X-Persona header? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Someone forwarded to me a particularly slimy piece of spam, 15kb in length, that did not have a From: or Reply-to: header, but did an X-Persona: header line. Equinox.net and Psi.net were on the received from: headers. Anyone else have experience with this? The person who sent it to me claimed to have received it 25 separate times in the last 24-36 hours. Bill Fant From owner-list-managers-outgoing Mon May 26 21:29:12 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id VAA16307 for list-managers-outgoing; Mon, 26 May 1997 21:27:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ayla.idyllmtn.com (ayla.idyllmtn.com [206.16.238.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id VAA16290 for ; Mon, 26 May 1997 21:27:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gates.idyllmtn.com (ip217.pom.primenet.com [204.212.52.217]) by ayla.idyllmtn.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id VAA25675; Mon, 26 May 1997 21:25:32 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970526212320.006a2720@mail.idyllmtn.com> X-Sender: kynn@mail.idyllmtn.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 21:26:28 -0700 To: Bill Fant From: Kynn Bartlett Subject: Re: X-Persona header? Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 10:29 PM 5/26/97 -0400, Bill Fant wrote: >Someone forwarded to me a particularly slimy piece of spam, 15kb in >length, that did not have a From: or Reply-to: header, but did an >X-Persona: header line. Equinox.net and Psi.net were on >the received from: headers. Anyone else have experience with this? The >person who sent it to me claimed to have received it 25 separate times in >the last 24-36 hours. At least one place that X-Persona: comes from is the Eudora program -- which allows you to have multiple addresses for sending and retrieving email. If you send me email at my valor@lsh.org address, I get an "X-Persona: Valor" header added on, and I think it sticks around if I reply to you. -- /\ /\ /\ /\ Kynn Bartlett / kynn@idyllmtn.com / \ / \/ \ / \ Idyll Mountain Internet / \ //\ /\ \ / \ '_| _` // \/ \__\ '_| _` ICQ: 780498 From owner-list-managers-outgoing Tue May 27 01:29:12 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id BAA09082 for list-managers-outgoing; Tue, 27 May 1997 01:21:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from frege.math.ethz.ch (frege-d-math-north-g-west.math.ethz.ch [129.132.145.3]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id BAA09075 for ; Tue, 27 May 1997 01:20:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaden.math.ethz.ch (bollow@vaden [129.132.146.136]) by frege.math.ethz.ch (8.6.12/Main-STAT-mailer) with ESMTP id KAA14164; Tue, 27 May 1997 10:22:01 +0200 Received: (bollow@localhost) by vaden.math.ethz.ch (8.6.9/D-MATH-client) id KAA26858; Tue, 27 May 1997 10:23:04 +0200 Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 10:23:04 +0200 Message-Id: <199705270823.KAA26858@vaden.math.ethz.ch> From: Norbert Bollow To: Postmaster@CompuServe.COM CC: list-managers@greatcircle.com, owner-churchplanters@genesis.acu.edu In-reply-to: <970527020735_27.400_JHL105-1@CompuServe.COM> (message from Unknown CompuServe address on 26 May 97 22:07:35 EDT) Subject: Re: Returned Message -- Re: Supporting church planters Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk To compuserve postmaster: Sending DSNs to mailing list contributors (i.e. the address in the From: header field, instead of the envelope From address address) is a violation of RFC822 and a very bad practice. Please fix this ASAP. To list-managers: What do people think about a joint boykott to disallow mailing list subscriptions from hosts which are known to send DSNs not to the envelope >From address but to some other address? (Is there a blacklist of such hosts already?) - NB. > Date: 26 May 97 22:07:35 EDT > From: Unknown CompuServe address > Content-Type: text > Content-Length: 3069 > > Contents: > > 1 * Latin-1 * > 2 Re: Supporting church planters > > ================================= Begin Part 1 ================================= > > The attached message could not be delivered to the > following recipients: > > bc: SRG1 WASEM > WCAN From owner-list-managers-outgoing Thu May 29 18:17:12 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id RAA28093 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 29 May 1997 17:57:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id RAA28085 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 29 May 1997 17:57:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from colossus.arl.mil (colossus.arl.mil [131.218.204.98]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id PAA01725 for ; Tue, 27 May 1997 15:29:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [131.218.204.98] by colossus.arl.mil with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Tue, 27 May 1997 18:35:31 -0400 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Organization: Little to None X-Mailer: Eudora 3.0 for Cray Y-MP Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 18:35:22 -0400 To: List Abuse , List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM, listmom-talk@skyweyr.com From: Vince Sabio Subject: Spammer Subscribes to List Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Hi folks, Earlier today, I had a spammer (unbeknown[st] to me that he was a spammer, of course) subscribe to a discussion list that I manage. The list is set to POST-BY-SUBSCRIBERS, so non-subbers cannot post. Toward the end of the day, he posted the following spam; I'll leave in the interesting parts only: --- begin forwarded text Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 16:34:41 -0400 Reply-To: Macintosh News and Information Sender: Macintosh News and Information From: "(no name available)" Subject: JokeMaster Ready for Download To: MAC-L@LIST.NIH.GOV ANNOUNCING JOKEMASTER JokeMaster is now ready for download! JokeMaster is a massive database (over ::snip:: If you'd like more information before downloading the program -- or if you'd like a small sampling of jokes sent to you via e-mail before downloading -- send e-mail to JokeMaster@kagi.com. ::snip:: --- end forwarded text I'll be contacting Kagi as well as AOL; if you want to add this idiot to your filter schemes (or .ignored files), you might want to add BOTH addresses: RediRef@AOL.COM JokeMaster@kagi.com Stop spam; see .sig ... :-) ___________________________________________________________________________ - Vince Sabio Support the anti-spam amendment -- wavelet@colossus.arl.mil join CAUCE: From owner-list-managers-outgoing Thu May 29 18:20:28 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id RAA28014 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 29 May 1997 17:56:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: (mcb@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) id RAA28006 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 29 May 1997 17:56:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cinna.ultra.net (cinna.ultra.net [199.232.56.8]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id KAA07277 for ; Tue, 27 May 1997 10:05:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from voyager (d16.dial-1.wal.ma.ultra.net [146.115.77.16]) by cinna.ultra.net (8.8.5/ult1.04) with SMTP id NAA19014 for ; Tue, 27 May 1997 13:07:27 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19970527170837.00ab4180@pop.ma.ultranet.com> X-Sender: stanr@pop.ma.ultranet.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 13:08:37 -0400 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: Stan Ryckman Subject: Re: Returned Message -- Re: Supporting church planters Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 10:23 AM 5/27/97 +0200, Norbert Bollow wrote: >To compuserve postmaster: > >Sending DSNs to mailing list contributors (i.e. the address in the From: >header field, instead of the envelope From address address) is a violation >of RFC822 and a very bad practice. Please fix this ASAP. > >To list-managers: > >What do people think about a joint boykott to disallow mailing list >subscriptions from hosts which are known to send DSNs not to the envelope >>From address but to some other address? (Is there a blacklist of such hosts >already?) I got one such bounce this morning as well, except with "Reply-To: listname" it was mailed back to the list. LISTSERV intercepted it and sent it to me. It was a "full mailbox" bounce. Another one just arrived for the same subscriber; it, however, was sent to the *correct* address (the SMTP MAIL FROM), so whatever the problem was, Compuserve seems to have fixed it. I'd advise not getting so excited about "boycotts" (note spelling) unless a site consistently refuses to fix problems. The major players (including Compuserve) try to follow the rules, I'm sure, but accidents will happen. BTW, the RFC you should cite is RFC1123, not RFC822. And, unfortunately (and I can't understand why), the bouncing to the envelope-From address is a SHOULD rather than a MUST in this RFC. Be aware of this before taking too much of a self-righteous stand when criticizing. Cheers, Stan From owner-list-managers-outgoing Thu May 29 18:59:38 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id SAA02578 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 29 May 1997 18:45:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cantec.com ([206.31.250.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id SAA02568 for ; Thu, 29 May 1997 18:45:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www ([206.31.250.15]) by cantec.com with SMTP (IPAD 1.52) id 4466800 ; Thu, 29 May 1997 21:49:02 EST Message-Id: <2.2.32.19970530014933.00315208@cantec.com> X-Sender: dbigham@cantec.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 21:49:33 -0400 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Dave Bigham Subject: Re: X-Persona header? Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Personally, I'm VERY leary of any header for identification purposes. Virtually anything can be spoofed. The only things I put any stock into at all is contact info for sales in the body and the Received From: header immediately prior to my system. Dave Bigham At 10:29 PM 5/26/97 -0400, you wrote: >Someone forwarded to me a particularly slimy piece of spam, 15kb in >length, that did not have a From: or Reply-to: header, but did an >X-Persona: header line. Equinox.net and Psi.net were on >the received from: headers. Anyone else have experience with this? The >person who sent it to me claimed to have received it 25 separate times in >the last 24-36 hours. > >Bill Fant > From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 30 01:44:50 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id BAA06938 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 30 May 1997 01:34:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ns0.eris.dera.gov.uk (ns0.eris.dera.gov.uk [128.98.1.1]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with SMTP id BAA06912 for ; Fri, 30 May 1997 01:34:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 20132 invoked from network); 30 May 1997 08:36:43 -0000 Received: from eden.dra.hmg.gb (qmailr@146.80.10.29) by ns0.eris.dera.gov.uk with SMTP; 30 May 1997 08:36:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 12994 invoked from network); 30 May 1997 07:37:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wandle.dra.hmg.gb) (146.80.15.36) by eden.dra.hmg.gb with SMTP; 30 May 1997 07:37:21 -0000 Received: from rivers.dra.hmg.gb by wandle.dra.hmg.gb with smtp(Smail3.1.28.1 #64) id m0wXNAz-0005kAC; Fri, 30 May 97 09:36 WET DST To: Stan Ryckman cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Returned Message -- Re: Supporting church planters Organization: IT Vulnerabilities Group, DERA Malvern, UK References: <2.2.32.19970527170837.00ab4180@pop.ma.ultranet.com> In-reply-to: <2.2.32.19970527170837.00ab4180@pop.ma.ultranet.com> Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 09:36:45 +0100 Message-ID: <11232.864981405@rivers.dra.hmg.gb> From: Christopher Samuel Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message <2.2.32.19970527170837.00ab4180@pop.ma.ultranet.com>, Stan Ryckman writes: [CompuServe bouncing to wrong addresses] > I got one such bounce this morning as well, except with > "Reply-To: listname" it was mailed back to the list. A list I used to run outside of work melted down well over a year ago due to exactly this reason. The fact that there were other Compu$erve subscribers on the list exacerbated this when they ran out of space in their mailboxes as well. > LISTSERV intercepted it and sent it to me. > It was a "full mailbox" bounce. Unfortunately Majordomo (at the time) didn't spot it. :-( > Another one just arrived for the same subscriber; it, however, was sent > to the *correct* address (the SMTP MAIL FROM), so whatever the problem > was, Compuserve seems to have fixed it. Nope, welcome to the wonderful world of Compu$erve inconsistent mail servers. Depending on the path the message takes, the phase of the moon, etc, you will get different behaviours. When the list I ran melted down I complained to the Compu$erve postmaster. All I can assume is that they bin anything sent to that address, as I've never managed to get a response from it. The only time I did get a reply was when one of the former Compu$erve subscribers complained internally. They promised that they were trying to sort things out with respect to conformance to the RFCs. > I'd advise not getting so excited about "boycotts" (note spelling) unless > a site consistently refuses to fix problems. The major players (including > Compuserve) try to follow the rules, I'm sure, but accidents will happen. I have a little sympathy for Compu$erve because of the sheer size of their operation. However, I think the changes in question should not have been necessary in the first place as they should have been RFC compliant from the start. RFC821 has been around for 15 years now, they should have heard of it by now. :-) > BTW, the RFC you should cite is RFC1123, not RFC822. And, unfortunately > (and I can't understand why), the bouncing to the envelope-From address > is a SHOULD rather than a MUST in this RFC. Be aware of this before taking > too much of a self-righteous stand when criticizing. In section 5.3.3 I believe that the reason it is a SHOULD and not a MUST is because it is immediately followed by an exception, the statement saying it MUST NOT generate notifications to the null address <>. Earlier (section 5.2.8 - DATA command) it does state that: When the receiver-SMTP makes "final delivery" of a message, then it MUST pass the MAIL FROM: address from the SMTP envelope with the message, for use if an error notification message must be sent later (see Section 5.3.3). There is an analogous requirement when gatewaying from the Internet into a different mail environment; see Section 5.3.7. Section 5.3.7 says: (E) The translation algorithm used to convert mail from the Internet protocols to another environment's protocol SHOULD try to ensure that error messages from the foreign mail environment are delivered to the return path from the SMTP envelope, not to the sender listed in the "From:" field of the RFC-822 message. IMHO, the SHOULD here is relating to the technical possibility, rather than the whim of the implementer. Again this is all IMHO, standard disclaimers apply. cheers! 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+ +QMAIL+ +PGP+ From owner-list-managers-outgoing Fri May 30 22:44:33 1997 Received: (majordom@localhost) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-Lists-970308-1) id WAA19612 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 30 May 1997 22:40:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx1.eskimo.com (mx1.eskimo.com [204.122.16.48]) by honor.greatcircle.com (8.8.5/Honor-970427-1) with ESMTP id WAA19605 for ; Fri, 30 May 1997 22:40:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eskimo.com (jimo@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA28418 for ; Fri, 30 May 1997 22:43:42 -0700 From: Jim Osborn Received: by eskimo.com (8.8.5) id WAA12066; Fri, 30 May 1997 22:43:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 22:43:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199705310543.WAA12066@eskimo.com> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: RFC1123 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk [was: Re: Returned Message -- Re: Supporting church planters] Stan Ryckman notes: >...the RFC you should cite is RFC1123, not RFC822. And, unfortunately >(and I can't understand why), the bouncing to the envelope-From address >is a SHOULD rather than a MUST in this RFC. Be aware of this before taking >too much of a self-righteous stand when criticizing. I've had a spate of bounce messages to the digest Reply-To address from cc:Mail sites, notably mcgraw-hill.com. Notes to their postmaster seem to go ignored, and don't bounce themselves. Fortunately, the mailer-daemon filters keep them off the list and out of a loop, but I'm always worried that they'll get one of these things through the filters somehow and create a big mess with a loop, so I tend to refuse subscriptions to sites that continue to send this sort of bounce. It's not criticism, just self defense. You never know when they'll hide the fact that they're a daemon. Jim