Chris!

It looks like your other mailserver subscribes to the same blacklist.

I laughfed when most of Spain got blacklisted the other week, but beeing
in that situation is no fun at all :(

I hope that the good people at chello.se will soon solve the problem.

/jens

--- Begin Message ---
--===========================_ _= 4403991(9113)1083388412
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

This Message was undeliverable due to the following reason:

Each of the following recipients was rejected by a remote mail server.
The reasons given by the server are included to help you determine why
each recipient was rejected.

    Recipient: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
    Reason:    Service unavailable; Client host [213.46.243.22] blocked using 
spamsource.ukpost.com; Site blacklisted - for more details see 
http://www.ukpost.com/spamsource.html


Please reply to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
if you feel this message to be in error.

--===========================_ _= 4403991(9113)1083388412
Content-Type: message/delivery-status
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Reporting-MTA: dns; amsfep14.chello.nl
Arrival-Date: Sat, 1 May 2004 07:13:31 +0200
Received-From-MTA: dns; c213-89-89-16.cm-upc.chello.se (213.89.89.16)

Final-Recipient: RFC822; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Action: failed
Status: 5.2.0
Remote-MTA: dns; mail.ferventsoftware.com (217.158.120.143)
Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 554 Service unavailable;
        Client host [213.46.243.22] blocked using
        spamsource.ukpost.com; Site blacklisted - for more details see
        http://www.ukpost.com/spamsource.html

--===========================_ _= 4403991(9113)1083388412
Content-Type: message/rfc822

Received: from c213-89-89-16.cm-upc.chello.se ([213.89.89.16]) by
        amsfep14-int.chello.nl (InterMail vM.6.00.05.02
        201-2115-109-103-20031105) with ESMTP id
        <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
        for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sat, 1 May 2004 07:13:31 +0200
Subject: [Fwd: Mail System Error - Returned Mail]
From: Jens M Andreasen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-docOuQVloAOeNyjG3WP0"
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.4-8mdk 
Date: Sat, 01 May 2004 07:15:49 +0200


--=-docOuQVloAOeNyjG3WP0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

This Message was undeliverable due to the following reason:

Each of the following recipients was rejected by a remote mail server.
The reasons given by the server are included to help you determine why
each recipient was rejected.

    Recipient: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
    Reason:    Service unavailable; Client host [213.46.243.22] blocked
using spamsource.ukpost.com; Site blacklisted - for more details see
http://www.ukpost.com/spamsource.html


Please reply to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
if you feel this message to be in error.

--=-docOuQVloAOeNyjG3WP0
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Description: Forwarded message - Mail System Error - Returned Mail
Content-Type: message/rfc822

Return-Path: <>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
From: Mail Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Mail System Error - Returned Mail
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004 11:06:38 +0200
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status;
        Boundary="===========================_ _=
        9512634(9113)1083315998"


--===========================_ _= 9512634(9113)1083315998
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

This Message was undeliverable due to the following reason:

Each of the following recipients was rejected by a remote mail server.
The reasons given by the server are included to help you determine why
each recipient was rejected.

    Recipient: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
    Reason:    Service unavailable; Client host [213.46.243.22] blocked using 
spamsource.ukpost.com; Site blacklisted - for more details see 
http://www.ukpost.com/spamsource.html


Please reply to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
if you feel this message to be in error.

--===========================_ _= 9512634(9113)1083315998
Content-Type: message/delivery-status
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Reporting-MTA: dns; amsfep14.chello.nl
Arrival-Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004 11:06:36 +0200
Received-From-MTA: dns; c213-89-89-16.cm-upc.chello.se (213.89.89.16)

Final-Recipient: RFC822; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Action: failed
Status: 5.2.0
Remote-MTA: dns; mail.all-day-breakfast.com (217.158.120.143)
Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 554 Service unavailable;
        Client host [213.46.243.22] blocked using
        spamsource.ukpost.com; Site blacklisted - for more details see
        http://www.ukpost.com/spamsource.html

--===========================_ _= 9512634(9113)1083315998
Content-Type: message/rfc822

Received: from c213-89-89-16.cm-upc.chello.se ([213.89.89.16]) by
        amsfep14-int.chello.nl (InterMail vM.6.00.05.02
        201-2115-109-103-20031105) with ESMTP id
        <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
        for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 30 Apr 2004 11:06:36 +0200
Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] RFC: Disposable Soft Synth Interface
From: Jens M Andreasen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Chris Cannam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
        <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
        <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
        <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.4-8mdk 
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004 11:08:55 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On tor, 2004-04-29 at 16:11, Chris Cannam wrote:
> On Thursday 29 Apr 2004 2:19 pm, Jens M Andreasen wrote:
> > I think I will not be really, totally happy before I see something
> > like:
> >
> >   void (*midi_msg)(LADSPA_Handle instance,
> >                    unsigned byte msg[4]);
> 
> This would be exactly equivalent to the existing run_synth(), would it 
> not?

Mmm .. This would replace, I think, all of your considerations on how to
extend LADSPA. It is (probably?) the only extension really needed. MIDI
is a very powerful protcol, and the beuty is that the client needs only
to implement those parts it needs to get going. 

For a synthesizer one can ignore start, stop and pause as well as SMPTE,
but for a sequencer or arpeggiator timing would be the name of the game.
As a synthesizer developer I *could*, if I wish so, implement
running-status and thus discover that I have been disconnected, but it
is not required ...

> Chris
> 


--===========================_ _= 9512634(9113)1083315998--


--=-docOuQVloAOeNyjG3WP0--


--===========================_ _= 4403991(9113)1083388412--


--- End Message ---

Reply via email to