Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[John R. Dennison]

On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 02:48:52PM +, Always Learning wrote:
> 

Noise removed.

Is it too much to ask for that this thread, if not the list as a whole,
return to being CentOS specific?





John
-- 
IRC - Where men are men, women are men and little girls are FBI.


pgpFP9FwTfOn6.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Always Learning]

On Mon, 2014-11-17 at 08:55 +0800, Christopher Chan wrote:

> On Sunday, November 16, 2014 12:21 AM, Always Learning wrote:
> > Writing as a humble programmer, why don't you and Les write your own
> > database application (using HTML, CSS, PHP and MariaDB (MySQL)) and
> > store the important parts (or wholes) of emails in the database ?

> Please, not another Exchange idea.

Happily I never used Exchange but I have suffered from misconfigured
Exchange installations.

> > Data can be retrieved in less than 2 seconds. The inbuilt links produce
> > lists of related items. The system links into other databases
> > (Names/addresses/emails/telephone numbers, information storage etc.
> > etc.)

> Microsoft needs to hire you.

Definite don't want anything to do with Micro$oft. I take pride in the
work I do. That is incompatible with the M$ philosophy.

-- 
Regards,

Paul.
England, EU.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Christopher Chan]

On Sunday, November 16, 2014 12:21 AM, Always Learning wrote:

On Fri, 2014-11-14 at 11:50 -1000, Miranda Hawarden-Ogata wrote:


I could do that I suppose, but I haven't and probably wouldn't have the
time necessary to separate out the emails between the two accounts. I
already have 6+ email accounts that I have to monitor so I'd rather not
fork off another if I can help it.
It's not the time, just the byte volume. I get ~15GB of space for free
per account, I think.
The vast majority of my email unfortunately is not publicly archived, so
I don't have that option.

Writing as a humble programmer, why don't you and Les write your own
database application (using HTML, CSS, PHP and MariaDB (MySQL)) and
store the important parts (or wholes) of emails in the database ?

Please, not another Exchange idea.



I do this. I can search on 'text', database entry descriptions, 6
keyword fields, entry date, overdue date etc. and can email out from
within the database system which has menu lists of email addresses. I
can have 1 million topics and each topic can have 99 items of separate
correspondence. Each separate item can link to 9 web items or stored
items (PDFs, ODT, pictures etc.) stored on the server.

Blinks.



Data can be retrieved in less than 2 seconds. The inbuilt links produce
lists of related items. The system links into other databases
(Names/addresses/emails/telephone numbers, information storage etc.
etc.)

Microsoft needs to hire you.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Peter]

On 11/16/2014 02:45 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
> the other important feature the new mailman has is to munge the From:
> field if the user's DNS has the DMARC records indicating a draconian
> policy.

Grrr, yes, of course, DMARC likes to check the From: header now (utterly
stupid).  Anyways, it should be possible to rewrite this with
header_checks as well.  I would tack @centos.org onto the end of the
domain and call it a day.


Peter
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[John R Pierce]

On 11/15/2014 5:17 PM, Peter wrote:

I think it's important to note that this actually isn't a bug.  This is
failure to strip DKIM headers when forwarding a message.  Note that when
RHEL6 was released DKIM was still new and DMARC was pretty much unheard
of.  It's not surprising that the version of Mailman in it does not take
steps to remove DKIM headers as it's simply a feature that would not
have existed when that version was released.


the other important feature the new mailman has is to munge the From: 
field if the user's DNS has the DMARC records indicating a draconian policy.


--
john r pierce  37N 122W
somewhere on the middle of the left coast

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Peter]

On 11/16/2014 12:09 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> The point is that mailman has the fix.  I suppose you can look at the
> question of whether you solve the problem only for yourself or for all
> centos users as two different things but the solution is pretty much
> the same as any other bug that has been fixed (far) upstream.

I think it's important to note that this actually isn't a bug.  This is
failure to strip DKIM headers when forwarding a message.  Note that when
RHEL6 was released DKIM was still new and DMARC was pretty much unheard
of.  It's not surprising that the version of Mailman in it does not take
steps to remove DKIM headers as it's simply a feature that would not
have existed when that version was released.

It's also important to note that these headers *can* be removed in
postfix (and probably other MTAs can as well) after the messages are
submitted by mailman, so while it would be nice for mailman to do it
it's not strictly necessary, we can deal with the problem with the
versions of mailman and postfix that are running on the server already.
 The trick is to simply set header_checks to match and remove the DKIM
header which is quite easy.

At that point we can have the server sign the message with its own DKIM
signature and apply any relevant DMARC policy we want.

I guess what I'm saying is you don't *need* a new version of mailman to
deal with this, you don't need a new version of any software really, it
can be dealt with the software we already have on the server with just a
few config changes.


Peter
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Karanbir Singh]

On 15/11/14 23:09, Les Mikesell wrote:

> The point is that mailman has the fix.  I suppose you can look at the
> question of whether you solve the problem only for yourself or for all
> centos users as two different things but the solution is pretty much
> the same as any other bug that has been fixed (far) upstream.
> 

or host the fix in the plus repos and let people decide which mailman
they want to use.

-- 
Karanbir Singh
+44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh
GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Les Mikesell]

On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Karanbir Singh  wrote:
> On 14/11/14 18:09, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 4:07 AM, Karanbir Singh  wrote:
>>>
 So in practice I think this really boils down to the common problem of
 ancient software shipped by RHEL and the bug-for-bug compatibility in
 CentOS with the list system eating its own dog food.  That is, there
 is a fix for mailman, but not in the CentOS version. Sometimes
 stability is good, sometimes you need the updates.
>>>
>>> can you file this at bugs.centos.org please
>>>
>>
>> There was already one:
>> https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=7149
>> is about this issue.  It already has a comment about centos following
>> upstream, but upstream doesn't seem to care unless you have paid
>> support:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095359
>>
>
> there are really 2 differnet things here, 1) what is the mailman
> included in a specific centos vesion doing and 2) what is the
> lists.centos.org machine doing with DKIM and what is the larger fix for
> each of those things.

The point is that mailman has the fix.  I suppose you can look at the
question of whether you solve the problem only for yourself or for all
centos users as two different things but the solution is pretty much
the same as any other bug that has been fixed (far) upstream.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
  lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Peter]

On 11/16/2014 11:11 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
> 2) what is the
> lists.centos.org machine doing with DKIM and what is the larger fix for
> each of those things.

Did you get the off-list email I sent a couple days ago irt this?


Peter
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Karanbir Singh]

On 14/11/14 18:09, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 4:07 AM, Karanbir Singh  wrote:
>>
>>> So in practice I think this really boils down to the common problem of
>>> ancient software shipped by RHEL and the bug-for-bug compatibility in
>>> CentOS with the list system eating its own dog food.  That is, there
>>> is a fix for mailman, but not in the CentOS version. Sometimes
>>> stability is good, sometimes you need the updates.
>>
>> can you file this at bugs.centos.org please
>>
> 
> There was already one:
> https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=7149
> is about this issue.  It already has a comment about centos following
> upstream, but upstream doesn't seem to care unless you have paid
> support:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095359
> 

there are really 2 differnet things here, 1) what is the mailman
included in a specific centos vesion doing and 2) what is the
lists.centos.org machine doing with DKIM and what is the larger fix for
each of those things.

-- 
Karanbir Singh
+44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh
GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Miranda Hawarden-Ogata]

On 2014/11/15 08:28, Les Mikesell wrote:

On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 10:21 AM, Always Learning  wrote:

Why keep masses and masses of irrelevant data in an unstructured format
presided over by Google?  Its not logical sense.  Essentially, why store
a lot of "rubbish" that will never ever be needed ?


Email is inherently unstructured and searches are over some set of
words that I happen to remember.   So you really need a full text
indexer which google happens to be very good at.  And the storage is
their problem...Actually thunderbird is very nice at this too if
you do have your own copy - I don't remember if you have to enable
indexing or if it is the default now.

Why? Because keeping "masses of irrelevant data" takes none of my time 
and when I need to dig for something there are ways to do so that cost 
me little or no time. Storing the irrelevant data is cheap, my time 
isn't and I have very little time to spend on something like email. I 
converged on a solution that works for me and lets me do my job and take 
care of my family in a relatively efficient way. Sure there are all 
sorts of things I could do to be "better" but I have neither the time or 
resources to devote to making those happen. So I live with what I have.


Les, I believe TB does index by default. I recall seeing a setting for 
that someplace in the menus. Thunderbird's search is pretty good, pretty 
much like gmail's in fact.


Miranda
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Les Mikesell]

On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 10:21 AM, Always Learning  wrote:
>
> Why keep masses and masses of irrelevant data in an unstructured format
> presided over by Google?  Its not logical sense.  Essentially, why store
> a lot of "rubbish" that will never ever be needed ?
>

Email is inherently unstructured and searches are over some set of
words that I happen to remember.   So you really need a full text
indexer which google happens to be very good at.  And the storage is
their problem...Actually thunderbird is very nice at this too if
you do have your own copy - I don't remember if you have to enable
indexing or if it is the default now.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
  lesmiks...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Always Learning]

On Fri, 2014-11-14 at 11:50 -1000, Miranda Hawarden-Ogata wrote:

> I could do that I suppose, but I haven't and probably wouldn't have the 
> time necessary to separate out the emails between the two accounts. I 
> already have 6+ email accounts that I have to monitor so I'd rather not 
> fork off another if I can help it.

> It's not the time, just the byte volume. I get ~15GB of space for free 
> per account, I think.

> The vast majority of my email unfortunately is not publicly archived, so 
> I don't have that option.

Writing as a humble programmer, why don't you and Les write your own
database application (using HTML, CSS, PHP and MariaDB (MySQL)) and
store the important parts (or wholes) of emails in the database ?

I do this. I can search on 'text', database entry descriptions, 6
keyword fields, entry date, overdue date etc. and can email out from
within the database system which has menu lists of email addresses. I
can have 1 million topics and each topic can have 99 items of separate
correspondence. Each separate item can link to 9 web items or stored
items (PDFs, ODT, pictures etc.) stored on the server.

Data can be retrieved in less than 2 seconds. The inbuilt links produce
lists of related items. The system links into other databases
(Names/addresses/emails/telephone numbers, information storage etc.
etc.)

Why keep masses and masses of irrelevant data in an unstructured format
presided over by Google?  Its not logical sense.  Essentially, why store
a lot of "rubbish" that will never ever be needed ?

Happy Weekend.


-- 
Regards,

Paul.
England, EU.




___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Miranda Hawarden-Ogata]

On 2014/11/14 11:32, Les Mikesell wrote:

On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 3:02 PM, Miranda Hawarden-Ogata
 wrote:
If you auto-mark as read, how do you ever know when it really is read? 

I don't use the gmail interface for day-to-day email processing, for
precisely that reason. It is why I resort to TB.

I don't get it.  Why auto-mark read in the first place?
Marking it as read removes it from my gmail inbox for the times when I 
~do~ need to read email using the gmail interface.

When I'm at work I read all
email with a work-centric focus.

I have a completely separate work account.  With its own restrictions
and retention policies.  It hasn't always been that way but it seems
easier now (someone else manages that server).
I could do that I suppose, but I haven't and probably wouldn't have the 
time necessary to separate out the emails between the two accounts. I 
already have 6+ email accounts that I have to monitor so I'd rather not 
fork off another if I can help it.

Which is handy when my email goes back
15+ years and google won't let me keep it all there without paying for it
which I'd rather not do.

I have 100+GB of google-space without paying extra, I think partly as
a side effect of the android phone I use. And I don't think there is
any time-related restriction.
It's not the time, just the byte volume. I get ~15GB of space for free 
per account, I think.

For the older email, those TB clients are the only
copies I have. Even though I have backups, I still do this because recovery
has been very quick this way (just replace the dead profile with the good
one).

And of course, when the apocalypse comes and gmail goes away, I'm all
prepared! [/joke]

I used to pull copies to my own server with fetchmail, and later
imap-synced with thunderbird (sometimes including the All Mail
folder).  But the computers that used to do that have all died of old
age so I gave up on being more reliable than google.   Besides, with
the work stuff in a separate account it is almost exclusively list
mail that could be found in public archives anyway.
The vast majority of my email unfortunately is not publicly archived, so 
I don't have that option.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Les Mikesell]

On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 3:02 PM, Miranda Hawarden-Ogata
 wrote:
>>>
>> If you auto-mark as read, how do you ever know when it really is read?
>>
> I don't use the gmail interface for day-to-day email processing, for
> precisely that reason. It is why I resort to TB.

I don't get it.  Why auto-mark read in the first place?

> When I'm at work I read all
> email with a work-centric focus.

I have a completely separate work account.  With its own restrictions
and retention policies.  It hasn't always been that way but it seems
easier now (someone else manages that server).

> Which is handy when my email goes back
> 15+ years and google won't let me keep it all there without paying for it
> which I'd rather not do.

I have 100+GB of google-space without paying extra, I think partly as
a side effect of the android phone I use. And I don't think there is
any time-related restriction.

> For the older email, those TB clients are the only
> copies I have. Even though I have backups, I still do this because recovery
> has been very quick this way (just replace the dead profile with the good
> one).
>
> And of course, when the apocalypse comes and gmail goes away, I'm all
> prepared! [/joke]

I used to pull copies to my own server with fetchmail, and later
imap-synced with thunderbird (sometimes including the All Mail
folder).  But the computers that used to do that have all died of old
age so I gave up on being more reliable than google.   Besides, with
the work stuff in a separate account it is almost exclusively list
mail that could be found in public archives anyway.
-- 
   Les Mikesell
 lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Miranda Hawarden-Ogata]

On 2014/11/14 10:38, Les Mikesell wrote:

On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Miranda Hawarden-Ogata
 wrote:

Matches: to:(centos@centos.org)
Do this: Skip Inbox, Mark as read, Apply label "Lists/centos", Never send it
to Spam

If you auto-mark as read, how do you ever know when it really is read?

I don't use the gmail interface for day-to-day email processing, for 
precisely that reason. It is why I resort to TB. When I'm at work I read 
all email with a work-centric focus. When I'm at home I read all email 
with a not-so-work-centric focus (unless I'm working from home, as I am 
today). But all email gets pulled to both locations. If something kills 
my work pc, I have a copy at home and vice versa. Which is handy when my 
email goes back 15+ years and google won't let me keep it all there 
without paying for it which I'd rather not do. For the older email, 
those TB clients are the only copies I have. Even though I have backups, 
I still do this because recovery has been very quick this way (just 
replace the dead profile with the good one).


And of course, when the apocalypse comes and gmail goes away, I'm all 
prepared! [/joke]

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Les Mikesell]

On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Miranda Hawarden-Ogata
 wrote:
>>
> Matches: to:(centos@centos.org)
> Do this: Skip Inbox, Mark as read, Apply label "Lists/centos", Never send it
> to Spam

If you auto-mark as read, how do you ever know when it really is read?

-- 
   Les Mikesell
 lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Miranda Hawarden-Ogata]

On 2014/11/14 05:32, Darr247 wrote:

On 14 November 2014 @05:34 zulu, Les Mikesell wrote:

Just guessing, but it may be that you are using POP to retrieve the
mail and getting an "uncategorized" view of new messages in the inbox,
where if you use IMAP (with the possibility of syncing to multiple
systems), gmail's labels are mapped to imap folders before you get
them.



You may be onto something, because I *am* using IMAP (TB's default 
during account setup) instead of POP3.


I'll be looking around in gmail next to see if there's some way to 
pre-sort mail from centos.org (as Miranda implied) before whatever 
mail app I'm using at the time fetches it.
I have never seen an online email interface I liked, so I don't spend 
much time in gmail's.


One of the things that drove me to linux (and I liked rpm/yum better 
than dpkg/apt) was microsoft disabling Windows Mail in Win7 to force 
people to use their online 'Live' email.


I primarily use pop (and imap and gmail interface when I need to), but 
since I read email with different focus when I'm at home or at work, 
popping the msgs has turned out to be the most efficient way for me to 
operate. I also have gmail filters set up. My centos filter is dead simple:


Matches: to:(centos@centos.org)
Do this: Skip Inbox, Mark as read, Apply label "Lists/centos", Never 
send it to Spam


So in the gmail interface and in the gmail imap setup in TB, I have a 
nice little cubbyhole that has all the centos emails in it.


Then when my TB clients pop the messages, they filter with this one:

name="CentOS"
enabled="yes"
type="17"
action="Move to folder"
actionValue="mailbox://nobody@Local%20Folders/08%20Lists/CentOS/centos"
action="Stop execution"
condition="OR (all addresses,contains,centos@centos.org) OR (all 
addresses,contains,mailman-ow...@centos.org)"


Interestingly, the filter in my home TB lacks the JunkScore=0 action, 
but seems to work just as well as the one at work that includes it.


Hope this helps.

Miranda

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Les Mikesell]

On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Darr247  wrote:
>
> Ah, but I also use it on CentOS... I just don't post as much from that copy.
> The point of that is to have at least 2 offline sources to my list
> subscriptions, since if the problem is with the network, having them all
> available only online is useless (my third full year of this list offline is
> close to complete).

Offline?  What's that and why does it matter?   I've already forgotten
everything I can look up on google, so the world stops without access.
But there is hardly anywhere I could go where I can't access gmail, at
least through the phone.

Besides, when you dig up that offline email copy you were looking for
it will tell you that to solve your problem you need to do an update -
which you won't be able to do without your network anyway.


-- 
Les Mikesell
 lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Darr247]

On 14 November 2014 @17:52 zulu, Les Mikesell wrote:

Given that you can use thunderbird on windows


Ah, but I also use it on CentOS... I just don't post as much from that 
copy. The point of that is to have at least 2 offline sources to my list 
subscriptions, since if the problem is with the network, having them all 
available only online is useless (my third full year of this list 
offline is close to complete).


I fully expect this laptop to die anytime, since I bought it in 2006 
(its current HDD is ~4-years old)... when that happens my next 
laptop/notebook will have CentOS installed on it (probably 7, even 
though I dislike GNOME3 about the same as vista compared to XP), and my 
backup copy will probably be on an Android tablet.  I've previously 
bought 2 copies of RedHat so I *have* contributed $$ to the cause, but I 
don't care much for the whole subscription model; Community support 
works fine for me (if I was running a business on it, I'm certain I'd 
feel differently about that).

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Les Mikesell]

On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 4:07 AM, Karanbir Singh  wrote:
>
>> So in practice I think this really boils down to the common problem of
>> ancient software shipped by RHEL and the bug-for-bug compatibility in
>> CentOS with the list system eating its own dog food.  That is, there
>> is a fix for mailman, but not in the CentOS version. Sometimes
>> stability is good, sometimes you need the updates.
>
> can you file this at bugs.centos.org please
>

There was already one:
https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=7149
is about this issue.  It already has a comment about centos following
upstream, but upstream doesn't seem to care unless you have paid
support:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095359

-- 
   Les Mikesell
  lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Les Mikesell]

On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 9:32 AM, Darr247  wrote:
>
> You may be onto something, because I *am* using IMAP (TB's default during
> account setup) instead of POP3.
>
> I'll be looking around in gmail next to see if there's some way to pre-sort
> mail from centos.org (as Miranda implied) before whatever mail app I'm using
> at the time fetches it.

I've used an assortment of methods over the years including using
fetchmail to drop in my own imap server host before gmail had imap
itself.  But, I've given up on thinking I can do it better than google
does.

> I have never seen an online email interface I liked, so I don't spend much
> time in gmail's.

I've grown to like gmail's web interface - or at least tolerate the
parts I don't like to get the part I do - which is mostly the raw
search capability that I use in favor of trying to categorize
anything, plus the fact that it is always in perfect sync with my
android phone where I read a lot but rarely type long replies.  Try
going into configuration settings to tune it more to your liking.  You
may want some of the 'labs' options.  In particular I don't think I
would like it without the auto-advance after archiving/deleting (that
is, go to the next message instead of redrawing the index list).

> One of the things that drove me to linux (and I liked rpm/yum better than
> dpkg/apt) was microsoft disabling Windows Mail in Win7 to force people to
> use their online 'Live' email.

Given that you can use thunderbird on windows, that doesn't make much
sense, but linux isn't a bad desktop these days.

The main thing that keeps me from using an email 'application' for
personal email is that I use an assortment of different machines
during the day and don't want to be tied to one or deal with the
differences in the way the apps would work across windows/linux/mac
versions even if I went to the trouble to install it and configure
imap sync everywhere. Plus, I really don't want to sync the huge 'all
mail' archived folder but I want searches to go there.   And, if you
haven't used gmail/yahoo/hotmail (now outlook.com) for a while you
might be surprised at how well the new web interfaces work and how
much you can customize them.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
 lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Darr247]

On 14 November 2014 @05:34 zulu, Les Mikesell wrote:

Just guessing, but it may be that you are using POP to retrieve the
mail and getting an "uncategorized" view of new messages in the inbox,
where if you use IMAP (with the possibility of syncing to multiple
systems), gmail's labels are mapped to imap folders before you get
them.



You may be onto something, because I *am* using IMAP (TB's default 
during account setup) instead of POP3.


I'll be looking around in gmail next to see if there's some way to 
pre-sort mail from centos.org (as Miranda implied) before whatever mail 
app I'm using at the time fetches it.
I have never seen an online email interface I liked, so I don't spend 
much time in gmail's.


One of the things that drove me to linux (and I liked rpm/yum better 
than dpkg/apt) was microsoft disabling Windows Mail in Win7 to force 
people to use their online 'Live' email.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Karanbir Singh]

On 11/12/2014 07:19 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:29 PM, Chris Adams  wrote:
>> Once upon a time, Kai Schaetzl  said:
>>> Well, *yes*. It's not business to be carried out on the list nor does the
>>> guy who moans about it seem to know why. And if you are the second from
>>> Gmail then please move it off-list as well. It's really not anyone's
>>> problem on this list what Gmail does.
>>
>> No, it isn't just "what Gmail does."  Yahoo and AOL are other major
>> handlers that do the same/similar thing (and there are other
>> not-as-major email handlers doing it too).  As has happened many times
>> in the past, the "rules" for email handling have changed.  The biggest
>> group of legitimate email handlers affected by this change is mailing
>> list handlers; they need to adapt or get blocked/sidelined/etc.
>>
>> Is it annoying?  Yep.  Is what these providers are doing a good idea?
>> That's debatable.  Is it here to stay?  Most likely.
> 
> So in practice I think this really boils down to the common problem of
> ancient software shipped by RHEL and the bug-for-bug compatibility in
> CentOS with the list system eating its own dog food.  That is, there
> is a fix for mailman, but not in the CentOS version. Sometimes
> stability is good, sometimes you need the updates.

can you file this at bugs.centos.org please

-- 
Karanbir Singh
+44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh
GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Alexander Farber]

On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 4:46 PM, Kai Schaetzl  wrote:
> That's ridiculous, you don't even know what's wrong or if it's wrong at
> all or what you want him to do but you have to cry it out loud to the list
> to put social pressure on him.

No, actually it's more like you have to get out of a bus -
And you ask a person at the door to move a bit.
Then suddenly some passengers turn to you and shout:
"You don't even know how to drive a bus." :-))

Greetings from Germany
Alex
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Les Mikesell]

On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 5:40 PM, Miranda Hawarden-Ogata
 wrote:
>>
> 3) I do not have any mailing list messages deposited in my spam boxes and do
> not have any "/dev/null" redirects either in gmail or in TB (and never will.
> I'm a sysad, therefore the word paranoid cannot be applied >:D). I can say
> with certainty that none of my mailing list emails have wound up in any of
> the 3 spam boxes that they could land in. I have checked them all. As I was
> mentioning, I have filters set up on all the mailing lists that I care about
> to not spam/junk any messages on those lists. And those filters have been
> working reliably for some time now. Which is why I am curious to know what
> is different between your filtering and mine.
>

Just guessing, but it may be that you are using POP to retrieve the
mail and getting an "uncategorized" view of new messages in the inbox,
where if you use IMAP (with the possibility of syncing to multiple
systems), gmail's labels are mapped to imap folders before you get
them.

-- 
  Les Mikesell
 lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Miranda Hawarden-Ogata]

On 2014/11/13 12:43, Darr247 wrote:

On 13 November 2014 @21:51 zulu, Miranda Hawarden-Ogata wrote:
Have you tried setting up the TB filter to mark as not-junk when it 
runs? Mine are set to "apply before junk classification" matching on 
"to/from/cc/bcc contains centos@centos.org" and then the actions are 
"move to folder", "set junk to not-junk", "stop filter exec". It 
seems to work, I don't recall getting any false-junks in quite a 
while... I do also have a gmail filter that "never spam" filters all 
centos.org email.


Thanks!
Miranda


1) You sent that to my email, not the list.
2) I already have "Filter before Junk Classification" selected in that 
filter's Getting New Mail picklist.
3) You should look in your Spam folder and see if there aren't some 
emails with [CentOS] in their Subject lines. If it's completely empty, 
possibly you're having TB delete emails it thinks are junk.


1) I replied privately to reduce the list load since it was a TB config 
issue that I was addressing and not particularly the topic being 
discussed, where you and I are doing something similar and I was 
interested to know why my solution works and yours doesn't. But oh well :)


2) The pertinent part of the TB filter was the "set junk to not-junk", 
but that will only work if the filtering is applied before TB junking 
occurs, which is why I mentioned it to confirm your settings.


3) I do not have any mailing list messages deposited in my spam boxes 
and do not have any "/dev/null" redirects either in gmail or in TB (and 
never will. I'm a sysad, therefore the word paranoid cannot be applied 
>:D). I can say with certainty that none of my mailing list emails have 
wound up in any of the 3 spam boxes that they could land in. I have 
checked them all. As I was mentioning, I have filters set up on all the 
mailing lists that I care about to not spam/junk any messages on those 
lists. And those filters have been working reliably for some time now. 
Which is why I am curious to know what is different between your 
filtering and mine.


Thanks!
Miranda

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Darr247]

On 13 November 2014 @21:51 zulu, Miranda Hawarden-Ogata wrote:
Have you tried setting up the TB filter to mark as not-junk when it 
runs? Mine are set to "apply before junk classification" matching on 
"to/from/cc/bcc contains centos@centos.org" and then the actions are 
"move to folder", "set junk to not-junk", "stop filter exec". It seems 
to work, I don't recall getting any false-junks in quite a while... I 
do also have a gmail filter that "never spam" filters all centos.org 
email.


Thanks!
Miranda


1) You sent that to my email, not the list.
2) I already have "Filter before Junk Classification" selected in that 
filter's Getting New Mail picklist.
3) You should look in your Spam folder and see if there aren't some 
emails with [CentOS] in their Subject lines. If it's completely empty, 
possibly you're having TB delete emails it thinks are junk.



___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Les Mikesell]

On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Darr247  wrote:
> On 13 November 2014 @14:53 zulu, Elias Persson wrote:
>>
>> Presumably you've already got a filter set up for applying a label to list
>> mails.
>
>
> Actually, on those 'dmarc=fail (p=REJECT/p=QUARANTINE' emails, Thunderbird
> ignores the filter that moves this list's emails into the local folder I
> have setup for it and instead puts them into the Spam folder... I have to
> manually go into the Spam folder in T-Bird and Mark them as Not Spam, then
> they're automatically moved back to the Inbox and my filter moves them to
> this list's folder.
>
> Is the SELinux list run on a different mail server?
> 'cause I haven't seen any 'dmarc=fail' emails to *that* list end up in my
> Spam folder.

That probably just means that no aol or yahoo users are SELinux experts

-- 
   Les Mikesell
 lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Darr247]

On 13 November 2014 @14:53 zulu, Elias Persson wrote:
Presumably you've already got a filter set up for applying a label to 
list mails.


Actually, on those 'dmarc=fail (p=REJECT/p=QUARANTINE' emails, 
Thunderbird ignores the filter that moves this list's emails into the 
local folder I have setup for it and instead puts them into the Spam 
folder... I have to manually go into the Spam folder in T-Bird and Mark 
them as Not Spam, then they're automatically moved back to the Inbox and 
my filter moves them to this list's folder.


Is the SELinux list run on a different mail server?
'cause I haven't seen any 'dmarc=fail' emails to *that* list end up in 
my Spam folder.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Chris Adams]

Once upon a time, Valeri Galtsev  said:
> I would second that. In general, it is rather discouraging to hear: "hey,
> fix that thing on your side. Of course, I can make your mail not go into
> my spambox on my side, but I don't care to change anything on my side".

The problem with that is, in some cases (depending on the provider's
spam filtering), messages may be outright rejected (because that's what
the configuration says to do).  The _only_ place that can be fixed
correctly is at the mailing list server (and that also requires a change
in one place, rather than every list subscriber adding local filters).
Telling everyone to add filters IMHO is really the same as the old spam
argument of "you can just hit delete".

If RHEL isn't going to get an updated mailman that conforms to current
(whether good or bad) "best practices", I'd be interested in seeing a
newer mailman packaged elsewhere (maybe EPEL?).

-- 
Chris Adams 
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[James B. Byrne]

On Wed, November 12, 2014 15:50, g wrote:
>
>
> On 11/12/2014 10:13 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:

>
>>
>> Well, no.  Per the headers:
>>
>> Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com:
>> centos-boun...@centos.org does not designate permitted sender hosts)
>> smtp.mail=centos-boun...@centos.org; dkim=neutral (body hash did not
>> verify) header.i=@; dmarc=fail (p=QUARANTINE dis=NONE)
>> header.from=harte-lyne.ca
>>
>> The p=quarantine setting from his server explicitly requests that
>> the message be marked as spam if it s not sent from an authorized
>> server, which don't include the centos list server. So it is accepted
>> and dropped in the spam folder as requested.
>>
>> And at the moment, he is the only list member that posts regularly
>> from a server with this setting.  (We don't even see ones with
>> p=reject, they'll bounce and get kicked off the list).
>
> Les,
>
> i believe problems are on your end, and not with server for James.
>
> i do not see "dmarc=fail" or "p=QUARANTINE" in *any* of his email
> headers.
>
> therefore, i suggest that it is problem that _you_need_to_correct_.
>

The problem is not within the span of control of anyone receiving this message
from the CentOS mailing list.  Les is not in a position to deal with this
issue any better than he already has.

The people that are receiving my messages marked as spam are seeing the result
of our DMARC disposition setting of quarantine.  That simply tells conforming
MX servers to mark the message as suspect and so allow the recipient to deal
with it.  And that is the proper thing for Google to do in our case.  Messages
coming from harte-lyne.ca certainly did not originate from centos.org
notwithstanding that is who is transmitting them.  And we are telling Google
that messages from harte-lyne.ca should only be received from our authorized
mails servers, which is perfectly correct.

Google's course of action thereby leaves it in the hands of the recipient to
manage what that fact means to them.  It tells them that this message is
routed in some unusual way and that it may be forged. That is important to
know before one opens a message purporting to originate from a trusted source.

As someone else pointed out, there is a philosophical question respecting who
is the originator of any message that travels through a distribution list. 
And it remains unresolved.  If the CentOS mailing list set the sender and from
headers of all traffic routed through it to itself then the problems you are
seeing with my messages would simply disappear.  Because I would no longer be
considered the originator. Something to that effect is what the changes to
Mailman-2.1.18 enable while retaining or setting the Reply-To header to the
original author's email address.  I am not sure of the details.

The retention of the originator's identity on mailing list mail is somewhat
inconsistent with the premise that whoever transmits a message is the
originator regardless of whoever wrote it.  One can see premise that in the
typical action of forwarding email from inside your MUA.  The sender becomes
the person forwarding the message, not the original author.

One also must consider that when one subscribes to a digest of mailing list
traffic, as I do to avoid the problems of identity that others experience,
then the sender and the from are always the list itself as it technically
impossible to have all of the the contributors designated as the Sender.  It
is therefore a valid question to ask how it comes to be that a collection of
messages sent one at a time for a given source differs in origin than one sent
as a single message from the same source?

DMARC is all about forgery and is a response, albeit in my opinion a poor one,
to the limitation found in most MUAs that only display the FROM header
regardless of the Sender.  Yahoo is draconian about this because, having had
their client's email accounts compromised through a security lapse on their
part, vast numbers of forged messages were sent to people with yahoo.com
accounts who lacked the technical sophistication to detect the fraud.

I apologise for the length of this reply.  DMARC is not a simple subject to
discuss.  The topic of email identity is highly politicized and technical
approaches to the question have already baffled some of the finest minds on
the IETF.  I doubt greatly that anyone here can propose any solution that has
not already been considered and rejected for either political or technical
reasons.

-- 
***  E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel  ***
James B. Byrnemailto:byrn...@harte-lyne.ca
Harte & Lyne Limited  http://www.harte-lyne.ca
9 Brockley Drive  vox: +1 905 561 1241
Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757
Canada  L8E 3C3

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Les Mikesell]

On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:25 AM, Valeri Galtsev
 wrote:
>
>
> I would second that. In general, it is rather discouraging to hear: "hey,
> fix that thing on your side. Of course, I can make your mail not go into
> my spambox on my side, but I don't care to change anything on my side".
> Well if you do care to have someone's e-mail, put some effort in it.
> Otherwise, if you don't care that much about that person's e-mail, why
> making all that buzz? It's pretty much the same as: if I do care someone
> hears understands what I say I do put effort into speaking loud enough and
> intelligible enough.

So you'd make some imaginary value judgement about the content of an
email before seeing it?  The concept doesn't make much sense in the
context of a technical list.  How would you know whether it is a
question you couldn't answer anyway  or the answer you were waiting
for that might have gone unseen?

> Consider it a point of view of external observer.

I look at my spam folder regularly, because I know that automations
generally make mistakes and what I find confirms that.  But that lets
one person see it - if he knows he was missing it in the first place.
If you are the one posting a message to a list and you'd like people
to see it, it would currently be wise to not send from an address
where the domain requests that messages forwarded by other systems be
quarantined or rejected.   And if you are running a list and would
like the members to see the messages you forward, it would be nice to
use current software so that actually will happen instead of just
hoping that all of the members know how to work around the problems
old software causes.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
 lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Valeri Galtsev]

On Thu, November 13, 2014 8:53 am, Elias Persson wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 2014-11-12 22:11, Les Mikesell wrote:
>
>> It's not my problem, it is what his domain says should be done
>> with mail claiming to be from there but isn't..  Your mail system
>> may simply ignore the request, but that doesn't mean it always will
>> or that it is the right thing to do.   And on a more practical
>> note, shouldn't be left as each recipient's problem.   And
>> particularly since it affects mail from yahoo.com and aol.com
>> senders, the long term fix will have to be in the list software
>> (and already is, in the current version).   Meanwhile, the
>> workaround is to not send with a From: address where the domain
>> requests that it not be forwarded.
>>
>
> It might not be your problem, but a perfectly workable solution is in
> your hands.
>
> Presumably you've already got a filter set up for applying a label to
> list mails. Simply check the "Never mark as spam" box and those mails
> will no longer be misplaced.
>

I would second that. In general, it is rather discouraging to hear: "hey,
fix that thing on your side. Of course, I can make your mail not go into
my spambox on my side, but I don't care to change anything on my side".
Well if you do care to have someone's e-mail, put some effort in it.
Otherwise, if you don't care that much about that person's e-mail, why
making all that buzz? It's pretty much the same as: if I do care someone
hears understands what I say I do put effort into speaking loud enough and
intelligible enough.

Consider it a point of view of external observer.

Valeri


Valeri Galtsev
Sr System Administrator
Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics
Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics
University of Chicago
Phone: 773-702-4247

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Les Mikesell]

On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 8:53 AM, Elias Persson  wrote:
>>
> Presumably you've already got a filter set up for applying a label to
> list mails. Simply check the "Never mark as spam" box and those mails
> will no longer be misplaced.
>

I don't bother defining filters for gmail.  It is capable of searching
for anything I might want to isolate on demand.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
 lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Elias Persson]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 2014-11-12 22:11, Les Mikesell wrote:

> It's not my problem, it is what his domain says should be done
> with mail claiming to be from there but isn't..  Your mail system
> may simply ignore the request, but that doesn't mean it always will
> or that it is the right thing to do.   And on a more practical
> note, shouldn't be left as each recipient's problem.   And
> particularly since it affects mail from yahoo.com and aol.com
> senders, the long term fix will have to be in the list software
> (and already is, in the current version).   Meanwhile, the
> workaround is to not send with a From: address where the domain
> requests that it not be forwarded.
> 

It might not be your problem, but a perfectly workable solution is in
your hands.

Presumably you've already got a filter set up for applying a label to
list mails. Simply check the "Never mark as spam" box and those mails
will no longer be misplaced.


- -- 
AF24 6DE9 D1DF DFB8 3A74  A7AC F457 B7A3 5DF1 4240
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2
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=IWDP
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Darr247]

On 12 November 2014 @22:47 zulu, Darr247 wrote:

On 12 November 2014 @20:50 zulu, g wrote:
i believe problems are on your end, and not with server for James. i 
do not see "dmarc=fail" or "p=QUARANTINE" in *any* of his email headers.


I think you're not seeing the full headers, then.

e.g. most of the headers of a recent message in here from James, and 
both those criteria appear about 5 lines down:


And here are headers from a yahoo.com sender, which I also dug out of my 
spam folder (I was pretty sure James was *not* the only one, but I 
hadn't seen any from other senders since this thread started)... note 
the "dmarc=fail (p=REJECT dis=NONE)" line:


Received-SPF: none (google.com: centos-boun...@centos.org does not 
designate permitted sender hosts) client-ip=72.26.200.203;

Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;
   spf=neutral (google.com: centos-boun...@centos.org does not 
designate permitted sender hosts) smtp.mail=centos-boun...@centos.org;

   dkim=neutral (body hash did not verify) header.i=@;
   dmarc=fail (p=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=yahoo.com
Received: from mail.centos.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mail.centos.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEB02A00361;
Wed, 12 Nov 2014 11:13:55 + (UTC)
X-Original-To: centos@centos.org
Delivered-To: centos@centos.org
Received: from nm33-vm5.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com
(nm33-vm5.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com [98.138.229.69])
by mail.centos.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 949F3A001C1
for ; Wed, 12 Nov 2014 11:13:53 + (UTC)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by nm33.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP;
12 Nov 2014 11:13:53 -
Received: from [98.138.226.180] by nm33.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with 
NNFMP;

12 Nov 2014 11:10:59 -
Received: from [98.138.89.160] by tm15.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with 
NNFMP;

12 Nov 2014 11:10:59 -
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1016.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP;
12 Nov 2014 11:10:59 -
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-4
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 659555.68554...@omp1016.mail.ne1.yahoo.com
Received: (qmail 89140 invoked by uid 60001); 12 Nov 2014 11:10:59 -
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024;
t=1415790659; bh=7qbieqBFb43LfAQpJtw5KO2xm6Rn/EkDckMX7LV8vb4=;

h=References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type;

b=jF9IP9S5JEqueyNjk3NCheNshejVdJ1Vx+Y69HnA570xRpMI72NND3yiGzHQiBIyhjhOZA37xc65I+4Bt0Mczl3+ohjPFgt9m/kCD+21sL2KkpHmrg0XdNc9OC+K7q89MVSHUi1wZJAZGjPFE/Qz622n+VCHKn9w8A1lGojk7b4=
X-YMail-OSG: qLXo8CgVM1n0YUBxJOr0lEPeaR8mb1G44c0HNETr4aSfPMs
rGnO0UgO3zcyVAEz9zgmftvHOq64olujwnboH7dL6n3OeNeaRjNwln07ewmj
E3vPdG0l.zipsTBWyHuWBUv8SlbMmS7pNSNkTnoYQbPeTEGNJmzIu4s11INb
rYUTKC1r6OgKlaOXh7moiXRxoQdL9nHKHZUz.DogQN5Qiz38hchKBJ0JgXC4
ty_xkUJA_OVNxRwCe4rz_rGVAuanVAY5J45ZXqK7W5_x0yrpPae03UWokpHs
I1.zs9DuUskb4zjFDFh3T2I9rqKGqARLzrT8SplNLd.qBVGAyx1NpK3GhHP1
_4agMu1d0iWqyz46vYN8KVIkAyuJCCJ.OTo0wUFmkCUO5DstvK8wFhpYCH7q
MXxoXL4kouNV_dpR0wcGPialrFjoltpR4heBkH7cOrCY.2lSJYoNFg3p8G6.
dpLPf8gIAOpjBVTfyo2XUW2DOUZNohfs9ITYmvGjNxGNVGPtkBhtvshMISFr
nN4tGR_M6KjhvQcEM9J3PFlpe1EHWRZLxS9n2DHJ9y_VjmYMXOqhvKq5fBgo
hzXEQu4W7y29eiHY8VQ--
Received: from [109.190.51.179] by web126105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com via HTTP;
Wed, 12 Nov 2014 03:10:59 PST
X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 002.001,

RnJvbTogR2lsYmVydCBTZWJlbnN0ZSA8c2ViZW5zdGVAd2VhdGhlci5hZG1pbi5uaXUuZWR1PgoKPiBPbiBNb24sIDEwIE5vdiAyMDE0LCBGcmFuayBDb3ggd3JvdGU6Cj4.ICB5dW0gaW5zdGFsbCBubS1jb25uZWN0aW9uLWVkaXRvcgo.IFllYWgsIEknbSBoYXZpbmcgYSB0b3VnaCBkYXksIFRIQVQgaXMgd2hlcmUgaXQgc2hvdWxkIGJlIGZvdW5kLAo.IGJ1dCBpc24ndCwgdW5kZXIgR25vbWUsIG9uIHRoaXMgb25lIG1hY2hpbmUuIFR5cGluZyB3aGF0IHlvdSBkaWQgYWJvdmUKPiBnYXZlIG1lIGFuIGVycm8BMAEBAQE-
X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.203.733
References:  
 
<20141110153844.573b95e1e53439551f4f2...@melvilletheatre.com>


Message-ID: <1415790659.59608.yahoomail...@web126105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 03:10:59 -0800
From: John Doe 
To: CentOS mailing list 
In-Reply-To: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Network menu doesn't appear on system menu on CentOS
6.6
X-BeenThere: centos@centos.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: CentOS mailing list 
List-Id: CentOS mailing list 
List-Unsubscribe: ,

List-Archive: 
List-Post: 
List-Help: 
List-Subscribe: ,

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: centos-boun...@centos.org



___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Les Mikesell]

On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 4:47 PM, Darr247  wrote:
> On 12 November 2014 @20:50 zulu, g wrote:
>>
>> i believe problems are on your end, and not with server for James. i do
>> not see "dmarc=fail" or "p=QUARANTINE" in *any* of his email headers.
>
>
> I think you're not seeing the full headers, then.
>
> e.g. most of the headers of a recent message in here from James, and both
> those criteria appear about 5 lines down:
>
> Received-SPF: none (google.com: centos-boun...@centos.org does not designate
> permitted sender hosts) client-ip=72.26.200.203;
> Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;
>spf=neutral (google.com: centos-boun...@centos.org does not designate
> permitted sender hosts) smtp.mail=centos-boun...@centos.org;
>dkim=neutral (body hash did not verify) header.i=@;
>dmarc=fail (p=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=harte-lyne.ca

These are added by the receiving google server as a trace for how it
processed the spf/dkim/dmarc options.   They wouldn't be present on a
receiving system that ignores them - and probably wouldn't match that
format in any case.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
 lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Darr247]

On 12 November 2014 @20:50 zulu, g wrote:
i believe problems are on your end, and not with server for James. i 
do not see "dmarc=fail" or "p=QUARANTINE" in *any* of his email headers.


I think you're not seeing the full headers, then.

e.g. most of the headers of a recent message in here from James, and 
both those criteria appear about 5 lines down:


Received-SPF: none (google.com: centos-boun...@centos.org does not designate 
permitted sender hosts) client-ip=72.26.200.203;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;
   spf=neutral (google.com: centos-boun...@centos.org does not designate 
permitted sender hosts) smtp.mail=centos-boun...@centos.org;
   dkim=neutral (body hash did not verify) header.i=@;
   dmarc=fail (p=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=harte-lyne.ca
Received: from mail.centos.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mail.centos.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CE62A00713;
Tue, 11 Nov 2014 17:34:07 + (UTC)
X-Original-To: centos@centos.org
Delivered-To: centos@centos.org
Received: from inet08.hamilton.harte-lyne.ca (inet08.hamilton.harte-lyne.ca
[216.185.71.28])
by mail.centos.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67F77A002CA
for ; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 17:34:04 + (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by inet08.hamilton.harte-lyne.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id B436E6043B
for ; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 12:34:04 -0500 (EST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at harte-lyne.ca
Received: from inet08.hamilton.harte-lyne.ca ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (inet08.hamilton.harte-lyne.ca [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new,
port 10024) with ESMTP id by9zNScqFHCh for ;
Tue, 11 Nov 2014 12:34:01 -0500 (EST)
Received: from webmail.harte-lyne.ca (inet04.hamilton.harte-lyne.ca
[216.185.71.24])
(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
(Client did not present a certificate)
by inet08.hamilton.harte-lyne.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 41849602AC
for ; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 12:34:00 -0500 (EST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=harte-lyne.ca;
s=dkim_hll; t=1415727240;
bh=bSzYYms7jOodBs74U9LvZAeQZVdsPPxt1/o9XNYXuR8=;
h=In-Reply-To:References:Date:Subject:From:To:Reply-To;
b=w1KDyK3Rm7K3CZzoP2ZdIAYwMZ1ZPANhjAn69iRCUvu+ggGgI/j7XBwmXRvYxFC5B
GMNJQG6nuEEzhemHim3w5NsmPf2UL/n8LDBPzHvhLYwg3P+2L7GjaWG7tDhG3UDM+H
u1v1AS75zKzrf5yznmW91ctz1+jm0Oprn/STmdOYolBeKeiKbNO7sWPfnnHIGk8ml6
tRg4r/WrnwlgxoNc4n6U/r9aLpIkaygm51yzDDPscVz0dWyoP1FCcwCqRKzFy6qF5C
L+uCbolF2JlYG1dN10v0t1v3GcMX5un9m73jGHW+fGFfMXSOy9uWBh6D25NLW0T/Gw
UuiAj65wERRBA==
Received: from 216.185.71.44 (SquirrelMail authenticated user byrnejb)
by webmail.harte-lyne.ca with HTTP; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 12:34:00 -0500
Message-ID: 
In-Reply-To: 
References: 
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 12:34:00 -0500
From: "James B. Byrne" 
To: "CentOS mailing list" 
User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.22-4.el6
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Importance: Normal
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Non-Gnome desktop
X-BeenThere: centos@centos.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: CentOS mailing list 
List-Id: CentOS mailing list 
List-Unsubscribe: ,

List-Archive: 
List-Post: 
List-Help: 
List-Subscribe: ,

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: centos-boun...@centos.org



___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Les Mikesell]

On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:50 PM, g  wrote:
>
>> Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com:
>> centos-boun...@centos.org does not designate permitted sender hosts)
>> smtp.mail=centos-boun...@centos.org; dkim=neutral (body hash did not
>> verify) header.i=@; dmarc=fail (p=QUARANTINE dis=NONE)
>> header.from=harte-lyne.ca
>
> Les,
>
> i believe problems are on your end, and not with server for James.
>
> i do not see "dmarc=fail" or "p=QUARANTINE" in *any* of his email
> headers.

They are not 'in' his headers.  They are the settings in his domain's
DNS dmarc record.

Do:
nslookup -type=txt _dmarc.harte-lyne.ca
to see the record, and you'll see the 'p=quarantine' which says that
mail with 'From: ' addresses claiming to be some...@harte-lyne.ca that
is not sent from their approved hosts should be quarantined.

> therefore, i suggest that it is problem that _you_need_to_correct_.
>
> because you are pulling emails from your server and if your email
> client is thunderbird, simply create a filter for James where the
> actions is;
>
>Set Junk Status to   Not Junk

I'm not pulling emails from a server, I'm using gmail's web interface
because it is much more convenient to use from multiple systems.  And
even if I used imap to sync, I think it would already appear in the
spam folder.

>
> then you can stop loading this list with needless *junk* rants
> about *your* problem.

It's not my problem, it is what his domain says should be done with
mail claiming to be from there but isn't..  Your mail system may
simply ignore the request, but that doesn't mean it always will or
that it is the right thing to do.   And on a more practical note,
shouldn't be left as each recipient's problem.   And particularly
since it affects mail from yahoo.com and aol.com senders, the long
term fix will have to be in the list software (and already is, in the
current version).   Meanwhile, the workaround is to not send with a
From: address where the domain requests that it not be forwarded.

-- 
  Les Mikesell
 lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[g]

On 11/12/2014 10:13 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Kai Schaetzl
>  wrote:
>> That's ridiculous, you don't even know what's wrong or if it's
>> wrong at all or what you want him to do but you have to cry it out
>> loud to the list to put social pressure on him.

very good point Kai.

>
> Well, no.  Per the headers:
>
> Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com:
> centos-boun...@centos.org does not designate permitted sender hosts)
> smtp.mail=centos-boun...@centos.org; dkim=neutral (body hash did not
> verify) header.i=@; dmarc=fail (p=QUARANTINE dis=NONE)
> header.from=harte-lyne.ca
>
> The p=quarantine setting from his server explicitly requests that
> the message be marked as spam if it s not sent from an authorized
> server, which don't include the centos list server. So it is accepted
> and dropped in the spam folder as requested.
>
> And at the moment, he is the only list member that posts regularly 
> from a server with this setting.  (We don't even see ones with 
> p=reject, they'll bounce and get kicked off the list).

Les,

i believe problems are on your end, and not with server for James.

i do not see "dmarc=fail" or "p=QUARANTINE" in *any* of his email
headers.

therefore, i suggest that it is problem that _you_need_to_correct_.

because you are pulling emails from your server and if your email
client is thunderbird, simply create a filter for James where the
actions is;

   Set Junk Status to   Not Junk

then you can stop loading this list with needless *junk* rants
about *your* problem.

thank you.


-- 

peace out.

in a world with out fences, who needs gates.

tc,hago.

g
.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Les Mikesell]

On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:29 PM, Chris Adams  wrote:
> Once upon a time, Kai Schaetzl  said:
>> Well, *yes*. It's not business to be carried out on the list nor does the
>> guy who moans about it seem to know why. And if you are the second from
>> Gmail then please move it off-list as well. It's really not anyone's
>> problem on this list what Gmail does.
>
> No, it isn't just "what Gmail does."  Yahoo and AOL are other major
> handlers that do the same/similar thing (and there are other
> not-as-major email handlers doing it too).  As has happened many times
> in the past, the "rules" for email handling have changed.  The biggest
> group of legitimate email handlers affected by this change is mailing
> list handlers; they need to adapt or get blocked/sidelined/etc.
>
> Is it annoying?  Yep.  Is what these providers are doing a good idea?
> That's debatable.  Is it here to stay?  Most likely.

So in practice I think this really boils down to the common problem of
ancient software shipped by RHEL and the bug-for-bug compatibility in
CentOS with the list system eating its own dog food.  That is, there
is a fix for mailman, but not in the CentOS version. Sometimes
stability is good, sometimes you need the updates.

There is still something of a philosophical issue in changing the
apparent authorship (From: ) of the message...


Here's an interesting bug report filed 5/7/2014 by, ummm, James Byrne:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1095359
with the apparent resolution being that you need a support contract to
discuss problems.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
 lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Chris Adams]

Once upon a time, Kai Schaetzl  said:
> Well, *yes*. It's not business to be carried out on the list nor does the 
> guy who moans about it seem to know why. And if you are the second from 
> Gmail then please move it off-list as well. It's really not anyone's 
> problem on this list what Gmail does.

No, it isn't just "what Gmail does."  Yahoo and AOL are other major
handlers that do the same/similar thing (and there are other
not-as-major email handlers doing it too).  As has happened many times
in the past, the "rules" for email handling have changed.  The biggest
group of legitimate email handlers affected by this change is mailing
list handlers; they need to adapt or get blocked/sidelined/etc.

Is it annoying?  Yep.  Is what these providers are doing a good idea?
That's debatable.  Is it here to stay?  Most likely.
-- 
Chris Adams 
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Les Mikesell]

On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Kai Schaetzl  wrote:
> Les Mikesell wrote on Wed, 12 Nov 2014 10:13:07 -0600:
>
>> Well, no.
>
> Well, *yes*. It's not business to be carried out on the list nor does the
> guy who moans about it seem to know why. And if you are the second from
> Gmail then please move it off-list as well. It's really not anyone's
> problem on this list what Gmail does.

Gmail isn't making this up, it is doing what the sender's domain
explicitly tells it to do with mail with a From: address in that
domain when it is (re)sent by a non-permitted host.  So yes it is
relevant to the list that if you don't want your mail to end up in
spam folders you shouldn't use a From: address in a domain that sets
p=quarantine or p=reject in its dmarc record, because that is exactly
what those say to do per the faq from www.dmarc.org.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
 lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Kai Schaetzl]

Les Mikesell wrote on Wed, 12 Nov 2014 10:13:07 -0600:

> Well, no.

Well, *yes*. It's not business to be carried out on the list nor does the 
guy who moans about it seem to know why. And if you are the second from 
Gmail then please move it off-list as well. It's really not anyone's 
problem on this list what Gmail does.


Kai


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Les Mikesell]

On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Les Mikesell  wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Kai Schaetzl  wrote:
>> That's ridiculous, you don't even know what's wrong or if it's wrong at
>> all or what you want him to do but you have to cry it out loud to the list
>> to put social pressure on him.
>
> Well, no.  Per the headers:
>
> Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;
>spf=neutral (google.com: centos-boun...@centos.org does not
> designate permitted sender hosts) smtp.mail=centos-boun...@centos.org;
>dkim=neutral (body hash did not verify) header.i=@;
>dmarc=fail (p=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=harte-lyne.ca
>
>
> The p=quarantine setting from his server explicitly requests that the
> message be marked as spam if it s not sent from an authorized server,
> which don't include the centos list server. So it is accepted and
> dropped in the spam folder as requested.
>
> And at the moment, he is the only list member that posts regularly
> from a server with this setting.  (We don't even see ones with
> p=reject, they'll bounce and get kicked off the list).
>

I guess that last part isn't true.  Apparently forwarded yahoo senders
also go to spam instead of bouncing:

Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;
   spf=neutral (google.com: centos-boun...@centos.org does not
designate permitted sender hosts) smtp.mail=centos-boun...@centos.org;
   dkim=neutral (body hash did not verify) header.i=@;
   dmarc=fail (p=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=yahoo.com

Anyway, you can see a domain's dmarc setting with:
nslookup -type=txt _dmarc.domain.com
and see the p= meanings at http://www.dmarc.org/faq.html
In particular, see http://www.dmarc.org/faq.html#r_2 for the effect on
mail lists.
   "If the domain in the From: header is from an organization that
publishes a DMARC record, the email is likely to not be delivered."

-- 
   Les Mikesell
  lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Les Mikesell]

On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Kai Schaetzl  wrote:
> That's ridiculous, you don't even know what's wrong or if it's wrong at
> all or what you want him to do but you have to cry it out loud to the list
> to put social pressure on him.

Well, no.  Per the headers:

Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;
   spf=neutral (google.com: centos-boun...@centos.org does not
designate permitted sender hosts) smtp.mail=centos-boun...@centos.org;
   dkim=neutral (body hash did not verify) header.i=@;
   dmarc=fail (p=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=harte-lyne.ca


The p=quarantine setting from his server explicitly requests that the
message be marked as spam if it s not sent from an authorized server,
which don't include the centos list server. So it is accepted and
dropped in the spam folder as requested.

And at the moment, he is the only list member that posts regularly
from a server with this setting.  (We don't even see ones with
p=reject, they'll bounce and get kicked off the list).

-- 
   Les Mikesell
 lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Valeri Galtsev]

On Wed, November 12, 2014 9:46 am, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> That's ridiculous, you don't even know what's wrong or if it's wrong at
> all or what you want him to do but you have to cry it out loud to the list
> to put social pressure on him. Please move this to private mail and
> understand that Gmail is *not* what rules email best practice and also try
> to understand what Gmail is telling *you* before you ask others to do
> something.
>
>
> Kai

+1
Bravo.

Valeri


Valeri Galtsev
Sr System Administrator
Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics
Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics
University of Chicago
Phone: 773-702-4247

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

[Kai Schaetzl]

That's ridiculous, you don't even know what's wrong or if it's wrong at 
all or what you want him to do but you have to cry it out loud to the list 
to put social pressure on him. Please move this to private mail and 
understand that Gmail is *not* what rules email best practice and also try 
to understand what Gmail is telling *you* before you ask others to do 
something.


Kai


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos