On 8 May 2006, at 22:04, William D. Tallman wrote: > On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 10:51:41AM -0500, Patrick Bogen wrote: >> On 5/8/06, William D. Tallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > <snip> > > This is the point at which Mailman initiates a response. > >>> May 7 20:25:31 mailhost sm-mta[4082]: k483PUSs004082: >>> from=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, size=2772, class=-60, >>> nrcpts=1, msgid=<mailman. >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>, >>> proto=ESMTP, daemon=MTA, relay=localhost [127.0.0.1] >>> May 7 20:25:31 mailhost sm-mta[4084]: k483PUSs004082: >>> to=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, delay=00:00:00, xdelay=00:00:00, >>> mailer=relay, >>> pri=140772, relay=smtp.olypen.com. [208.200.248.8], dsn=5.1.1, >>> stat=User >>> unknown >>> May 7 20:25:31 mailhost sm-mta[4084]: k483PUSs004082: >>> k483PVSs004084: >>> DSN: User unknown >> Mailman has generated a response, and attempted to send it to >> [EMAIL PROTECTED], but it was rejected by the remote SMTP server. >> The SMTP server reported 'User unknown'. Check the logs on >> smtp.olypen.com, if you can, for more information about this. > > Called Olypen, and it would seem that the smtp session must have gone > like such: > > telnet smtp.olypen.com 25 // Get okay. > HELO mailhost.locallan // Get okay (250). > MAIL From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] // User unknown? > > The tech support guy said that 'mailman-bounces' is an > unauthenticated > User, or so he thought. I'll know more later when the guy at the NOC > gets back to me. Maybe it will be a case of getting Mailman > authenticated on their smtp server. That sounds like the server will > only accept mail from subscribers, which makes sense. > > ----------------------------- > Addendum, just before sending this off: The NOC guy just called back, > and said that indeed 'mailman-bounces' is unauthorized at their smtp > server. After some discussion (very few of their subscribers run > Linux, > although they themselves run RedHat on their servers), I discovered > that > they are contemplating email list service as an addition to what they > already offer. > > Such service would be industrial/commercial and cost several hundred > bucks a month, I suggested, and we agreed I wouldn't be paying that > sort > of freight. OTOH, as they really like OS/FSF software, it would be > very > likely they would choose Mailman. With that in mind, I said I'd be > very > happy to share my experiences and what I learned if I could > successfully > set up my server. > > On that note, the guy said he would advocate opening their port 25 for > me, the decision to be made by the email sysadmin. So we'll see what > happens. > > OYAH (On Yet Another Hand...), if I could configure Mailman to use > 'my_list' instead of 'mailman-bounces', all this would be resolved, as > 'my_list' is an authenticated User; it's one of my mailbox addresses. > > If that is possible, that's what I would do. Hafta look at the source > code... and I've never even looked at Python... this oughta be fun!
The problem you get with this solution and the reason why outbound mail comes from the <listname>-bounces alias rather than the <listname> alias is that if outbound traffic to your subscribers bounces then the bounce messages end up being re-distributed to the subscribers, just like regular posts to the list! The bounces alias captures bounce messages and the Mailman bounce handler deals with them. > ----------------------------- >> -- SNIP -- >> >>> That's the end of the grunner log file. Note that no activity is >>> recorded for the time period of the maillog. >> The qrunners each, more or less, have their own logs. the main >> qrunner >> log only records what you see; when they started, when they failed, >> when they restarted. > > Okay, that makes sense. Didn't know what I should find there. > >>> And no mail is sent back out, apparently, because none is >>> received by >>> the list subscriber. >> See my comments above. >> >>> Now, I've already demonstrated my abysmal ignorance of this stuff in >>> previous comments, but I'd sure like to get this running if I >>> can. Is >>> there enough information here to diagnose this situation? If >>> not, what >>> can I provide? >> Mailman *seems* to be working, but I might be missing something. If >> nothing else, I don't know that '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' should be sending to >> the >> mailman list. > > Well, 'my_list@' is one of the email addresses I get with my > subscription to Olypen's services (5 with aDSL). So Fetchmail gets > mail > from that mailbox and sends it to Mailman. > > fetchmailrc snippet: > user 'my_list' there with password '******' is 'mailman' here > > 'mailman' is, of course, a user on this machine, so messages sent from > Fetchmail wind up in /var/spool/mail/mailman. Apparently, Mailman > likes > that just fine. > > The deal breaker here would be if Olypen insists on establishing > mailman-bounces as a separate subscriber. At that point, this entire > setup -> /dev/null. > > Thanks for this response; it verified my suspicions and pointed me to > the presumed source of the problem: the ISP. > Time to change? > Thanks for reading, > > Bill Tallman > ------------------------------------------------------ Mailman-Users mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp
