Hello there,
I am running a vServer on Debian6.
Via apt-get install mailman I installed and set up Mailman 2.1.13, which
is running fine with 5 mailing lists on my server.
Motivated by all those discussions about Yahoo's DMARC on this list, I
wondered whether I can upgrade my Mailman
Sascha Rissel writes:
Hello there,
I am running a vServer on Debian6.
Via apt-get install mailman I installed and set up Mailman 2.1.13, which
is running fine with 5 mailing lists on my server.
Motivated by all those discussions about Yahoo's DMARC on this list, I
wondered
Hi,
What'd be the trouble if I completely remove attachment from the message?
First I've copied the behavior of the Handler Scrubber.py and
ThunderBird filelink module.
It wipes the attachment but sill send a fake one. Which looks like:
--020101070601020108020001
On May 14, 2014, at 11:47 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull step...@xemacs.org wrote:
Peter Shute writes:
When MS365 forwards the mails sent to the distribution list, should
that make the DMARC authentication fail? I thought that only
happened if you made changes like adding a prefix to the subject
At Wed, 14 May 2014 21:40:12 +0200 Sascha Rissel mail...@rissel.it wrote:
Hello there,
I am running a vServer on Debian6.
Via apt-get install mailman I installed and set up Mailman 2.1.13, which
is running fine with 5 mailing lists on my server.
Motivated by all those discussions about
At Thu, 15 May 2014 16:32:30 +0900 Stephen J. Turnbull step...@xemacs.org
wrote:
Sascha Rissel writes:
Hello there,
I am running a vServer on Debian6.
Via apt-get install mailman I installed and set up Mailman 2.1.13, which
is running fine with 5 mailing lists on my server.
On May 15, 2014, at 12:21 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull step...@xemacs.org wrote:
Conrad G T Yoder writes:
Has anyone had to deal with bounces due to rate limiting from
Roadrunner/Time Warner?
Are these true bounces (ie, permanent delivery failures) or just the
temporary failures due to rate
On 05/15/2014 06:46 AM, Conrad G T Yoder wrote:
It is a true bounce - mail is being rejected. The error message is phrased
as a temporary failure, but the message is bounced at the SMTP transaction.
“At some point,” they stop bouncing. RR won’t say when that happens.
Folks:
I was previously running 2.1.17 (after having not upgraded for a VERY long
time). Everything is working just fine.
I saw the new DMARC modifications and decided to upgrade to 2.1.18-1.
The upgrade went fine ... but after running for a bit some of my users told me
that when they
On 05/15/2014 01:48 AM, Sylvain Viart wrote:
What'd be the trouble if I completely remove attachment from the message?
None if you do it correctly.
Assuming msg is a multipart message object with 3 subparts and you want
to delete the second of the 3 parts.
parts = msg.get_payload()
# parts
On 05/14/14 23:47, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Peter Shute writes:
When MS365 forwards the mails sent to the distribution list, should
that make the DMARC authentication fail? I thought that only
happened if you made changes like adding a prefix to the subject
line like Mailman does.
On May 15, 2014, at 10:53 AM, Gary Algier g...@ulticom.com wrote:
On 05/14/14 23:47, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
I then sent an email to the list and to my work sendmail address. It was
delivered to both work addresses and the iCloud address.
Gmail put it in my Spam folder with the
On 05/15/2014 07:39 AM, Gibbs, David wrote:
The upgrade went fine ... but after running for a bit some of my users told
me that when they replied to a list message it was going to the author of the
message they are replying to instead of the list. The Reply-to header was
*NOT* present in
On 05/15/14 11:15, Larry Finch wrote:
On May 15, 2014, at 10:53 AM, Gary Algier g...@ulticom.com wrote:
On 05/14/14 23:47, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
I then sent an email to the list and to my work sendmail address. It was
delivered to both work addresses and the iCloud address.
Gmail put
A list member recently tried to post a message to a list and the message was
discarded for no *appearent* reason. The only clue is that for some reason
the message is failing the DKIM check (DKIM=fail). I am using Mailman 2.1.16
on CentOS 5 (python-2.4.3-56.el5, httpd-2.2.3-85.el5.centos,
On 5/15/2014 10:11 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
On 05/15/2014 07:39 AM, Gibbs, David wrote:
The upgrade went fine ... but after running for a bit some of my
users told me that when they replied to a list message it was going
to the author of the message they are replying to instead of the
list.
On 5/14/2014 2:40 PM, Sascha Rissel wrote:
Hello there,
I am running a vServer on Debian6.
Via apt-get install mailman I installed and set up Mailman 2.1.13, which
is running fine with 5 mailing lists on my server.
Motivated by all those discussions about Yahoo's DMARC on this list, I
wondered
Barry,
It took me a while to determine what to do,
but after I had built and tested the package, I had no problems
building packages for subsequent Mailman releases. IIRC, the last
Mailman for which I built a package was 2.1.14. I do not know if
any changes since then would require changes
I'd be interested as well.
Bruce Harrison
UT Martin
-Original Message-
From: Mailman-Users [mailto:mailman-users-bounces+harrison=utm@python.org]
On Behalf Of Terry Earley
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 11:40 AM
To: mailman-users@python.org
Subject: Re: [Mailman-Users] Get newer
On 05/15/2014 08:43 AM, Robert Heller wrote:
A list member recently tried to post a message to a list and the message was
discarded for no *appearent* reason. The only clue is that for some reason
the message is failing the DKIM check (DKIM=fail). I am using Mailman 2.1.16
on CentOS 5
On 05/15/2014 08:58 AM, Gibbs, David wrote:
You can see the headers from a test message I sent when tracking down the
problem here: http://code.midrange.com/ab8c5f0363.html
It appears there are two incomplete sets of headers there. Lines 1-22
with some of the headers (Received: headers at
At Thu, 15 May 2014 17:14:38 -0700 Mark Sapiro m...@msapiro.net wrote:
On 05/15/2014 08:43 AM, Robert Heller wrote:
A list member recently tried to post a message to a list and the message
was
discarded for no *appearent* reason. The only clue is that for some reason
the message is
Conrad G T Yoder writes:
Are these true bounces (ie, permanent delivery failures) or just the
temporary failures due to rate limiting, causing delays of many hours
or days in delivery?
It is a true bounce - mail is being rejected. The error message is
phrased as a temporary
On May 14, 2014, at 22:47 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull
step...@xemacs.orgmailto:step...@xemacs.org wrote:
If distribution lists are pure forwards, MS365 will be OK. But I find
it hard to believe that that level of functionality is popular with
users -- there's a reason why all popular MLMs
From: Mark Sapiro m...@msapiro.net
On 05/14/2014 04:26 PM, Jan Steinman wrote:
I'm using the Mailman and postfix that came bundled with MacOS X 10.6 (Snow
Leopard) on a Mac Mini Server.
See the FAQ at http://wiki.list.org/x/OIDD. Yes, I know you probably
can't get help from Apple, but
On May 15, 2014, at 8:48 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull step...@xemacs.org wrote:
Conrad G T Yoder writes:
Are these true bounces (ie, permanent delivery failures) or just the
temporary failures due to rate limiting, causing delays of many hours
or days in delivery?
It is a true bounce - mail
On 05/15/2014 05:38 PM, Robert Heller wrote:
It wasn't any of these. I believe I have figured out what happened. The poster
did something 'bad': instead of creating a fresh message he located an old
message with a return address of the list and did a reply and then edited
*some* of the
At Thu, 15 May 2014 18:36:05 -0700 Mark Sapiro m...@msapiro.net wrote:
On 05/15/2014 05:38 PM, Robert Heller wrote:
It wasn't any of these. I believe I have figured out what happened. The
poster
did something 'bad': instead of creating a fresh message he located an old
message with
On 05/15/2014 08:35 AM, Gary Algier wrote:
However, the
mailing list software will use an envelope address from the list so SPF
should not fail.
SPF won't fail, but for DMARC purposes, the domain of the Envelope
sender that passes SPF will not align with the From: domain, so the
fact that
29 matches
Mail list logo
