Jeff,
Very well said! I am in 100% agreement with you. My hat is off to you and
to Michael and Judith!
THANKS FOR A GREAT RESOURCE GUYS!
Bill
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff Beer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2000 12:33 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [OT] This Mailing List (WAS [OT] Mail Delay ?)
>
>
> I apologize for the off-topic mail in advance. Off-topic mail
> sucks, and to
> send one knowing it's off-topic is a very bad thing, but I can't
> resist this
> time.
>
> I for one love this list, and love the way it's being handled. Every
> non-moderated (ie, each message is reviewed by a human before release)
> mailing list in existance has problems with off-topic mail from time to
> time. You can not stop it completely. You can only manage it, and it's a
> very time consuming task to do so. Same thing with technical glitches -
> they will happen. Michael has addressed these issues in the past, and I'm
> sure he will continue to do so. Concerning hardware and software
> implementations; this list has successfully processed huge amounts of mail
> in acceptable time frames. As Michael points out clearly below, he can't
> control the intermediate points.
>
> If someone can't definitively identify a choke point, don't expect Michael
> to fix it by buying new hardware and implementing a new software scheme.
>
> I hate the way people offer sweeping suggestions that involve completely
> redesigning a system without having a clue as to the origins of any
> perceived problems. Rather than sending an expensive and time consuming
> 'fix' up front, send a message that simply says "performance is
> down - need
> any help"? If he does he'll let you know. Arrogance sucks.
>
> I Really hate the way people send a demand, then expect an instant answer.
> Or worse, an instant implementation of their genius. Arrogance sucks.
>
> I Really Really hate the way some people assume that the list owner needs
> trivial advice, and shoves it down their throat, again without having a
> clue. Michael knows what he's doing - let him do it. Arrogance sucks.
>
> I Really Really Really hate the way some people try to get the
> list owner to
> make a change by sending manipulative messages to the list in an
> attempt to
> force change through 'popular opinion'. The people that do this should be
> in politics, not a technical field. Or, better yet, they should be a
> dictator for a small country. Arrogance sucks.
>
> * Michael and Judith already spend huge amounts of time with this list and
> their other activities for the CF community. I applaud them for it. This
> time takes away from the time they could be doing family things,
> or building
> their own futures. They have lives outside of this. Unselfishness rocks.
>
> * It's a free service to us, one of immeasurable value. I've saved big
> buck$ and huge amounts of time for myself, my clients and my
> employer(s) as
> a direct result of this free service. Unselfishness rocks.
>
> * Michael and Judith handle all of the tangible list expenses out
> of pocket
> (if I'm technically wrong, I'm sure the lion's share comes straight from
> their bank account). Unselfishness rocks.
>
>
> I apologize for my arrogance in sending this. Arrogance sucks.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Dinowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2000 1:31 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [OT] Mail Delay ?
>
>
> I looked over the queued message base and didn't see any from
> your domain. I
> did see some things like:
>
> *2 Message(s) queued for delphi.com
> *Reason: Couldn't establish SMTP connection on port 25 (1 message(s))
> *Reason: Server closed SMTP connection (RCPT TO: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (1
> message(s))
>
> *9 Message(s) queued for earthlink.net
> *Reason: Server failed (MAIL)
> *Last attempt: Sun May 21 00:06:34 2000
>
> *7 Message(s) queued for globo.com
> *Reason: MX lookup failure
>
> *255 Message(s) queued for treesage.com
> *Reason: Unknown
> *Last attempt: Sun May 21 00:46:42 2000
>
> As you can see, the reasons for mail not being sent can vary on a per
> machine basis. Have you asked the person who runs your mailserver
> about it?
> There may be something with the connection under high volume.
> The routing issues are people sending mail to others using the
> HoF server as
> their mailserver. Two days a week or so, I get 80 processes
> running routing
> messages rather than normal list functions. I'm hunting this down, but it
> takes time. The badly formatted mail headers causes a message to
> show up in
> the 'control' folder that can't be processed. This causes all threads to
> hang for some strange reason and has to be killed by hand.
> Finally, I agree totally about the OT messages. My office was offline all
> friday due to a bell atlantic problem (and a storm). I didn't see the
> messages till a lot later and was a bit upset to see so much of the list
> going to a 'nothing' topic. I mean, the virus was such a dud, it
> didn't even
> get to the list (which could also mean that everyone on the list is
> protected). One message as a warning and then over to community. I'm
> appointing a few 'extra' moniters to help move messages over to where they
> belong. If we can get the list tightened up, it'll save bandwidth
> and time.
> Ah, a perfect dream. :)
>
> > Michael,
> >
> > "route through the server and send badly formatted email headers"
> >
> > Could you clarify this? I'd like to know if there's something I'm doing
> > wrong, as I'm commonly seeing delays of six or more hours on week days.
> > Needless to say, twelve hour turnaround times seriously decrease the
> > usefulness of a support mailing list.
> >
> > I'd also like to see you address the recent increase in
> off-topic postings
> > to this list. If that's a part of the cause of the poor
> performance, then
> > I would think you'd be concerned. I've got no problem with someone
> > posting a virus warning, but why the hell does it need to generate 25
> > replies? It's gotten completely out of hand.
> >
> > Jim
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Michael Dinowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: Saturday, May 20, 2000 10:27 PM
> > Subject: Re: [OT] Mail Delay ?
> >
> >
> > >Len, no disrespect intended, but I do accept help when offered and have
> > >answered you a number of times in the past. All I ever seem to get from
> > you
> > >is public complaints (emailing me first and then the list 7
> minutes later
> > is
> > >a perfect example). I've sent the DNS issues to my ISP, but I
> fail to see
> > >how they are of massive importance to only you (re your isp taking you
> > off
> > >the list).
> > >Now, as for the machine, I've got 256 meg of ram and a high
> processor on
> > it
> > >already. I'll upgrade to a new machine as time and finances permit. As
> > for
> > >the delays, I've done a lot to fix them, but if people keep trying to
> > route
> > >through the server and send badly formatted email headers,
> problems will
> > >continue to pop up. This WILL change as new systems go online. I'd say
> > that
> > >90%+ of the time, the mail delay is within 10 minutes which is quite
> > >acceptable.
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> >It's because there are a ton of people subscribed to the
> list and the
> > >> >list is hosted on a server that could use an upgrade. It has a
> > tendency
> > >> >to get bogged down.
> > >> >
> > >> >So who wants to pitch in to buy Michael a new server?
> > >>
> > >> Wrong approach.
> > >>
> > >> He could keep his current server for the locgical list
> processing, and
> > >> undisruptivelyh add something like an old P200 or better
> with 128 megs
> > fo
> > >> RAM running FreeBSD + postfix as a relay-only mail gateway for doing
> > the
> > >> nasty task of actual mail delivery. But if history is any guide,
> > offers
> > >of
> > >> help don't get accepted. For a list this large and active and
> > important
> > >to
> > >> its members, CF-talk deserves better performance.
> > >>
> > >> For Imail (or any brand mailserver, even Michal's ), I've got a site
> > ...
> > >>
> > >> http://IMGate.MEIway.com
> > >>
> > >> ... that shows, and several ISP's done it successfully, how to build
> > such
> > >a
> > >> simple "appliance", including step-by-step for Installing FreeBSD and
> > the
> > >> postfix mailer. It would also give the CF-talk list Internet's best
> > >> anti-spam defense and DNS validations. A machine like that could
> > easily
> > >> handle several 100,000 msgs per day.
> > >>
> > >> Michael's DNS is also screwed up so, but he won't answer my repeated
> > mails
> > >> about how easily to fix it.
> > >>
> > >> Len
> >
> >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----
> > Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk
> > To Unsubscribe visit
> http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or
> send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in
> the body.
> >
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> --
> Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk
> To Unsubscribe visit
> http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or
> send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in
> the body.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------
> Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk
> To Unsubscribe visit
> http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf
_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
'unsubscribe' in the body.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk
To Unsubscribe visit
http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a
message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
