I was the TL of the second version of groups that added the improved web
archive and mailing lists, and ensured that usenet was well supported at
the time... and continued to maintain the incoming and posting servers
until a couple years back. The groups usenet archive is still available as
a web
- Original Message -
> From: "Chris"
> To: "Lyndon Nerenberg" , "jra"
> Cc: "Chris" , mailop@mailop.org
> On 2020-12-20 14:00, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
>>> The original quote, IIRC, was talking about Henry Spencer at UT Zoology, who
>>> got Usenet that way for a while.
>>
>> More likely
On 2020-12-20 14:00, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
The original quote, IIRC, was talking about Henry Spencer at UT Zoology, who
got Usenet that way for a while.
More likely it was in relation to Australia's Usenet "feed" which was a daily
FedEx air shipment of 9-track tapes. At the time, FedEx Air
> The original quote, IIRC, was talking about Henry Spencer at UT Zoology, who
> got Usenet that way for a while.
More likely it was in relation to Australia's Usenet "feed" which was a daily
FedEx air shipment of 9-track tapes. At the time, FedEx Air was cheaper than
the very expensive
- Original Message -
> From: "Chris via mailop"
> You'd ask a question of someone in Australia, and you generally had an
> answer within 3-4 days.
>
> Which led, in part, to the old meme "never underestimate the bandwidth
> of a shipment of magtapes".
"Never underestimate the bandwidth
In article <20201219223035.ga4...@rafa.eu.org> you write:
>Dnia 19.12.2020 o godz. 16:51:56 John Levine via mailop pisze:
>> Pursuant to our unconditional satisfaction guarantee, please find
>> enclosed a check for 200% of the amount you have paid Gmail to handle
>> your mail.
>
>Please note that
For a couple of years, the Usenet link to/from Australia were magtape
exchanges on a routine NASA flight out of, if I remember right, NASA
Ames. It was piggybacked on the shipment of data to/from joint
NASA-Australia projects. I used to correspond occasionally with the guy
involved in doing
Dnia 19.12.2020 o godz. 15:52:21 Bob Proulx via mailop pisze:
> Plus the SMTP protocol has never tried to be an end user visible
> protocol. Which, if implemented over Avian Carriers, might be
> unappealing to the consumer. Even if the cost is only bird seed. The
> diagrams in RFC 2549 I find
Sam Tuke via mailop wrote:
> With Gmail's self filtering folders, for many smaller hosts the
> chances of a message which gets a 250 response code being "received"
> (reach the eyeballs of the intended recipient) is lower than not. So
> 250 says more about Gmail internals (e.g. the message wasn't
Dnia 19.12.2020 o godz. 16:51:56 John Levine via mailop pisze:
> Pursuant to our unconditional satisfaction guarantee, please find
> enclosed a check for 200% of the amount you have paid Gmail to handle
> your mail.
Please note that not only "Gmail" as understood by the free mail service did
not
In article <0ea1d827-98d8-761d-cac4-4be972126...@lightmeter.io> you write:
>That's nice to know, but the fact is that messages accepted by Gmail sometimes
>disappear without a trace. No
>doubt that the systems involved on your side are massive and complex, but that
>shouldn't be our problem as
On 12/19/20 9:27 AM, Sam Tuke via mailop wrote:
> That's nice to know, but the fact is that messages accepted by Gmail
> sometimes disappear without a trace.
In my experience of investigating a few of these in detail, this is not
actually the case. Instead, what happens is that the Gmail
On 18/12/2020 23:00, Brandon Long wrote:
> So, returning 250 OK when delivering a message to spam is bad form
> now? Or a 4xx response to potential spam that you're not quite sure
> about?
With Gmail's self filtering folders, for many smaller hosts the chances of a
message which gets a 250
So, returning 250 OK when delivering a message to spam is bad form now? Or
a 4xx response to potential spam that you're not quite sure about?
Also, there is no provision in our spam system for dropping mail, it's
reject, deliver or bounce...
I guess workspace does add administrator actions
FWIW, partly inspired by this thread, I blogged about the week's Gmail fun here:
https://lightmeter.io/googledown-happens-every-day-for-mailops-admins/
Sam.
On 16/12/2020 15:34, Dr. Christopher Kunz via mailop wrote:
> Am 15.12.20 um 00:56 schrieb Bez Thomas via mailop:
>> Anyone else seeing
Am 15.12.20 um 00:56 schrieb Bez Thomas via mailop:
Anyone else seeing repeated, but intermittent, 550-5.1.1s from Gmail for valid
addresses?
Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 550-5.1.1 The email account that you tried to reach does
not exist. Please try
550-5.1.1 double-checking the recipient's email
On Tue, December 15, 2020 16:36, William Kern via mailop wrote:
> Our customers are beginning to see these today.
It seems to come in bursts. We are ignoring the 550 and queuing. Earlier
nothing was queued and now about 500 messages are in the queue but some new
mail is being accepted.
John
> Gmail was (and still is) sending out false ‘unknown address’
> responses. One person ever reported their own (working, logged into)
> gmail address bouncing.
can confirm
a quick twitter search indicates large numbers of people experiencing
the same
fwiw, i saw dead-air (messages accepted but
In article <739cfd79-71ae-4b3c-a9ad-e8db7aa5a...@wordtothewise.com> you write:
>
>Gmail was (and still is) sending out false ‘unknown address’ responses. One
>person ever reported their own (working, logged
>into) gmail address bouncing.
I think it's pretty obvious that whatever failed was not
Our customers are beginning to see these today.
When I looked at
https://www.google.com/appsstatus#hl=en=status
earlier this morning Gmail didn't acknowledge it
but I now see they are admitting to having a problem again as of a few
minutes ago.
William Kern
PixelGate Networks.
> On 15 Dec 2020, at 15:18, Bill Cole via mailop wrote:
>
> On 15 Dec 2020, at 6:14, Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop wrote:
>
>> But I assume the mailserver didn't get a *positive* reply "yes, it is
>> confirmed that the user DOESN'T exist" but simply wasn't able to connect to
>> the database and
On 15 Dec 2020, at 6:14, Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop wrote:
But I assume the mailserver didn't get a *positive* reply "yes, it is
confirmed that the user DOESN'T exist" but simply wasn't able to
connect to
the database and verify whether the user exists or not.
That assumption is called into
: Re: [mailop] GMail 550 5.1.1?
Same here, we saw this as well.
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 9:27 PM Tara Natanson via mailop
wrote:
>
> Looking at logs it seems this is clearing up.
>
> Now to cleanup all the false positive non-existent bounces!!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tara Nat
Dnia 15.12.2020 o godz. 11:33:06 Thomas Walter via mailop pisze:
>
> With all the services being down at the same time I am expecting it to
> be an issue with the central "user database" itself. In that case their
> mailserver simply didn't know users existed.
But I assume the mailserver didn't
On 15.12.20 11:16, Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop wrote:
> I wonder why they are returning 5xx and not 4xx when they have a failure. I
> think the system should be foolproof enough to return 4xx in such cases.
With all the services being down at the same time I am expecting it to
be an issue with the
Dnia 15.12.2020 o godz. 00:00:13 Tara Natanson via mailop pisze:
> Looking at logs it seems this is clearing up.
>
> Now to cleanup all the false positive non-existent bounces!!
I wonder why they are returning 5xx and not 4xx when they have a failure. I
think the system should be foolproof
Same here, we saw this as well.
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 9:27 PM Tara Natanson via mailop
wrote:
>
> Looking at logs it seems this is clearing up.
>
> Now to cleanup all the false positive non-existent bounces!!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tara Natanson
> Constant Contact
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 7:52
Looking at logs it seems this is clearing up.
Now to cleanup all the false positive non-existent bounces!!
Cheers,
Tara Natanson
Constant Contact
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 7:52 PM Thomas Walter via mailop
wrote:
> Hey,
>
> On 15.12.20 01:13, Jay Hennigan via mailop wrote:
> > Many Google
I had it for one on one email to addresses I know are good.
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 7:19 PM Tara Natanson via mailop
wrote:
> Sorry that sent before I finished typing.
>
> We are seeing huge spikes in those codes as well. Some testing shows that
> valid addresses are getting that response
Hey,
On 15.12.20 01:13, Jay Hennigan via mailop wrote:
> Many Google services including Gmail, Google Drive, and YouTube have
> been having issues today according to Outages mailing list. Though some
> are reporting restoration this could be lingering problems.
We are seeing it also.
On Dec 14, 2020, at 5:12 PM, David Landers via mailop wrote:
Yes, it started about an hour or so ago for us. Accounts that had delivered
yesterday or even earlier today in some cases are now seeing that error.
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 7:00 PM Bez Thomas via mailop
On 12/14/20 16:00, Tara Natanson via mailop wrote:
Heh, I just sent the same thing. We starte seeing it at 15:30 Eastern
US time.
Many Google services including Gmail, Google Drive, and YouTube have
been having issues today according to Outages mailing list. Though some
are reporting
Sorry that sent before I finished typing.
We are seeing huge spikes in those codes as well. Some testing shows that
valid addresses are getting that response intermittently as well.
Tara Natanson
Constant Contact
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 7:00 PM Tara Natanson
wrote:
> Heh, I just sent the
Yes, it started about an hour or so ago for us. Accounts that had
delivered yesterday or even earlier today in some cases are now seeing that
error.
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 7:00 PM Bez Thomas via mailop
wrote:
> Anyone else seeing repeated, but intermittent, 550-5.1.1s from Gmail for
> valid
Heh, I just sent the same thing. We starte seeing it at 15:30 Eastern US
time.
Tara
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 6:58 PM Bez Thomas via mailop
wrote:
> Anyone else seeing repeated, but intermittent, 550-5.1.1s from Gmail for
> valid addresses?
>
> Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 550-5.1.1 The email
Anyone else seeing repeated, but intermittent, 550-5.1.1s from Gmail for valid
addresses?
Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 550-5.1.1 The email account that you tried to reach does
not exist. Please try
550-5.1.1 double-checking the recipient's email address for typos or
550-5.1.1 unnecessary spaces.
36 matches
Mail list logo
