Re: Same messages?
On Thursday, January 25, 2001, 6:13:41 PM, Marck wrote: "Aborted" ... is there a clue there? The server keeps a list of UIDLs for messages left there. I TB seems to keep the list of UIDLs it has seen and grabs any messages with a UIDL which it hasn't seen before. I can see this quite clearly in the server logs. Pardon my ignorance, but what is UIDL? 2. The server didn't record the UIDL because it thought the downloadwas incomplete. I guess it's this part I don't understand. I though the server just keeps a list of all my messages on the server. And since the only way to remove a message from the server is by a command from TB, whether or not a download is complete should not matter, isn't it? 3. TB didn't record the UIDL because it thought the download was incomplete. That's plausible, but then the only dupe I should see is exactly the one a download is aborted. But my impression is when I see dupes, I see lots of them. But I'm not sure. As I said, I'll pay more attention next time. Thanks for your explanation. -- Best regards, Ming-Li The Bat! 1.49c | Win2k SP1 -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: Same messages?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Ming-Li, On 27 January 2001 at 09:42:08 -0800 (which was 17:42 where I live) Ming-Li wrote and made these points: ML Pardon my ignorance, but what is UIDL? Unique IDentifier List, a list of Unique Message Identifiers kept by the POP3 server. Server and clients alike use these IDs to synchronize between seen and unseen messages under POP3. - -- Cheers -- .\\arck D. Pearlstone -- Moderator TBUDL / TBBETA / TBTECH [ PGP Key ID: 0x929DCDA0 | www: http://www.silverstones.com ] [Any opinions are my own and not those of RIT labs ] TB! v1.49c S/N 14F4B4B2 on Windows NT 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 1 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 6.5.8 Secured Comment: PGP Sealed for freshness iQA/AwUBOnMYDjnkJKuSnc2gEQJrHACggfhPPzkQoRHV3ePaR1+jtfkAGdEAn3VR ohbPLNvqx9utnFqRVyutwCfC =JpDW -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: Same messages?
Hello Marck D. Pearlstone, On Fri, 26 Jan 2001 at 02:13:41 GMT +(which was 1/28/2001 9:13 AM where you think I live) you told to the list : ML ... usually (if not all) right after there was an aborted session. ML Since it's midday, TB shouldn't try to delete anything, and ML shouldn't have any problem remembering what's downloaded even if a ML POP session is aborted. MDP "Aborted" ... is there a clue there? The server keeps a list of UIDLs MDP for messages left there. I TB seems to keep the list of UIDLs it has MDP seen and grabs any messages with a UIDL which it hasn't seen before. I MDP can see this quite clearly in the server logs. MDP If you get a duplicate message it may be because: MDP 1. TB didn't record the UIDL when it got the message first time for no MDPreason. MDP 2. The server didn't record the UIDL because it thought the download MDPwas incomplete. MDP 3. TB didn't record the UIDL because it thought the download was MDPincomplete. MDP 4. The message got double relayed in the ISP server hive. (unlikely) MDP Option one and four both seem equally unlikely. There are MDP probably other possible reasons for UIDLs going missing, but I MDP can't think of them right now. There is: i.e. TB! on normal mode only maintain his own UIDL.DAT only (not sync with POPServer's UIDL.DAT). If you activate Leave message on Server, TB! UIDL.DAT sync with POPServer's UIDL.DAT (you may see on your MDaemon logs, TB! not issue UIDL command on normal mode, while issue UIDL and TOP command in Leave Message on Server mode). I talk to Stefan long time ago about this on TBBETA list. IMHO, there are some advantage/disadvantage using this approach : - TB! will minimize duplicate messages even if the POPServer not support UIDL (Pros) - You will get duplicate messages when you change from Leave Message on Server to Normal Mode or if you abort/cancel mail retrieval. Some POPServer having facility to Delete successful message download without waiting QUIT command confirmation, this feature called "asynchronous Mode" (QPOP, Cubic Circle have this feature as default while on MDaemon, Mercury you may active/deactive this feature). The current TB! approach will work better perfect if our POPServer support this feature. Some folks on UseNet ( I am now in the hot discussion about this on other list), mentioned that the current TB! approach much better than UIDL mechanism. It will help much for Dial Up users who have limited bandwith (low speed connection). IMHO, I have different opinion about this, for some reason : 1. Fact : not all ISP POPServer support Async. Mode (this is not RFC compliance though, and it's hard to force our ISP to support this feature due his Customer not only TB! or others Mailer that work like TB!G). 2. POPServer not only serve a little user/traffic or we only have a few messages on POPmailbox, there is an occasion POPServer very busy, on that case the POPServer will delay the deletion when the time permitted (he only make something like Watermark that those messages will delete ASAP). I prefer, if possible, TB! will have this approach : 1. Make UIDL Synchronization with POPServer's UIDL (IIRC Eudora have this option through changing his *.ini file). 2. Maintain previous UIDL.DAT (from last POP session), and re issue DELE command while skipping match UIDL (this work just like MDaemon DomainPOP engine). -- Best regards, - Syafril - ..Opinion expressed are only mine * Name : Syafril Hermansyah |Company : Duta Integrasi Pratama Mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |Voice : (62) (21) 385-1600 FAXto : (62)(21)351-9241 key:000FAX |URL : http://www.dutaint.co.id * Created : Sunday, January 28, 2001, 1:54:48 AM GMT +0700 -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: Same messages?
On Wednesday, January 24, 2001, 3:14:06 PM, Marck wrote: No, it doesn't apply. I have been leaving my mail on the server for 0 days (that's until midnight, same day) and have received *no* dupes under that condition. My POP3/SMTP server is on the LAN here so I have next to no connection problem (he said, fresh from fixing a BNC cable in the lounge that had taken out the entire network g). That figures. I never had this problem when I lived on campus (with ethernet connection). After moving out and switching to cable modem, it's no longer the same. I was hoping @Home (which took over our cable modem network) would be better, but so far my experience (and Nick's experience) isn't exactly encouraging. :-( ML Where does the difficulty lies, then, for TB to remember which ML has been downloaded, when a connection is broken, except maybe ML the last one? Because we're talking about a mail that TB believed it had deleted. The delete instruction never arrived at the server so the message stayed there and looked to TB like "fresh meat". Hmmm, in the case where mail is left on the server for n day, the deletion happens only when TB collects mail for the first time after midnight. Therefore, if there's any discrepancy, it should happen only right after that (unless it still couldn't delete mail properly in the second try). The experience here (both my wife's and mine) seems that we could get dupes through out the day, and usually (if not all) right after there was an aborted session. Since it's midday, TB shouldn't try to delete anything, and shouldn't have any problem remembering what's downloaded even if a POP session is aborted. I could be wrong about this but I don't think that I am. I have received unexpected dupes in TB but they have certainly arrived at my server as dupes. That's not the case here. I often check the server (with mail dispatcher) when I see a dupe, and haven't seen a real dupe so far. TB simply re-collects the same mail. Well, I'll look more closely next time. With the condition of my @Home connection, I think I'll see this again soon enough. -- Best regards, Ming-Li The Bat! 1.49c | Win2k SP1 -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: Same messages?
Hi there Marck, Going back 18:21 24.01.2001. when you uttered the following thoughts: lost before the DELE command was issued to remove the already received messages. This would leave the message on the server by accident and have it download a second time on the next connect and collect run. What I recently saw is that the SMTP server cannot send out the message correctly: ... DATA 354 go ahead! message . Then no response. The SMTPd flags "connection to mx1.xxx.xx timed out will retry later", but mx1 already queued and delivered the message. It should not, but it does. Cheers, Johannesmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Responsibility always exceeds authority. -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: Same messages?
Hi there Nick, Going back 06:08 25.01.2001. when you uttered the following thoughts: I don't believe so because I am receiving 95% of my eGroups Mailings. It's only *some* of those messages that are not getting through for some strange reason, and it's not just eGroups, but all my messages. Even test messages I send to myself may take 9 hours to get here, or they might arrive almost immediately. If I send one of those test messages to my [EMAIL PROTECTED] account from here, it arrives almost instantaneously. Does that sound like a POP3 or SMTP problem? Athome SMTP servers are a real pain. Most of times, I'd say roughly 75%, they just dont work. They have IIRc over 8 MXes, and all together suddenly time out But I feel the problem *is* with my POP3 Server, so I don't understand how having a Web Account with access to the Server will help at all. I have to contact, again, the @Home people and find out what is going on, but that has quickly become a never ending process. :o( My suggestion would be to forget about @Home servers. I've heard they provide a speedy access, but are having lousy mail systems. I swapped for the TB-mailinglists (due to the high traffic hehe ;) *g*) to a FreeMail system quite common here in Germany, web.de... It's fine now, better than before having to split the MLs over many accounts... Nick Cheers, Johannesmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Every solution breeds new problems. -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: Same messages?
Hi Ming-Li, On 25 January 2001 at 07:51:40 -0800 (which was 15:51 where I live) Ming-Li wrote and made these points: ML ... usually (if not all) right after there was an aborted session. ML Since it's midday, TB shouldn't try to delete anything, and ML shouldn't have any problem remembering what's downloaded even if a ML POP session is aborted. "Aborted" ... is there a clue there? The server keeps a list of UIDLs for messages left there. I TB seems to keep the list of UIDLs it has seen and grabs any messages with a UIDL which it hasn't seen before. I can see this quite clearly in the server logs. If you get a duplicate message it may be because: 1. TB didn't record the UIDL when it got the message first time for no reason. 2. The server didn't record the UIDL because it thought the download was incomplete. 3. TB didn't record the UIDL because it thought the download was incomplete. 4. The message got double relayed in the ISP server hive. (unlikely) Option one and four both seem equally unlikely. There are probably other possible reasons for UIDLs going missing, but I can't think of them right now. -- Cheers -- .\\arck D. Pearlstone -- Moderator TBUDL / TBBETA / TBTECH [ PGP Key ID: 0x929DCDA0 | www: http://www.silverstones.com ] [Any opinions are my own and not those of RIT labs ] TB! v1.49c S/N 14F4B4B2 on Windows NT 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 1 -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Same messages?
Hello tbudl, Does this problem happen only to me? I'm getting messages from these lists twice! I do not keep them on the server... what's wrong with my Bat? -- Best Regards, Lija, YUPCExpert-Owner [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re[2]: Same messages?
Hello Marck, On Wed, 24 Jan 2001, at 09:55:37 [GMT +] (10:55 my local time), you wrote: MDP Check the "You are subscribed as ..." line at the bottom of these MDP duplicates. You changed your subscription address - perhaps the MDP original is still a member. Nope, that's not the case... -- Best Regards, Lija, YUPCExpert-Owner [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: Same messages?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On January 24, 2001, at 12:02:45 AM, Lija Wrote: L Does this problem happen only to me? I'm getting messages from these L lists twice! I do not keep them on the server... what's wrong with my L Bat? I don't believe the fault lies with TB!. Here is an explanation I received from another List I'm on: L It is lazy SMTP Servers who do L not bother to parse their Envelope Addresses to remove Duplicates. L When the message addressee list is sorted so that the message can be L cloned (one copy per domain), the SMTP does not bother to parse the L list as it is cloning and ignore duplicates (which will sort together L so it does not even need to check the full list of addresses for the L current domain - only the last added to the cloned copy's Envelope L list). Nick N.J. Andriash [ TB! v1.49c | PGP 7.0.3 | Win 98 SE ] Vancouver, B.C. Canada | PGP Key ID: 0x7BA3FDCE -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 7.0.3 Comment: Join PGP-Basics: [EMAIL PROTECTED] iQA/AwUBOm8MacUChHR7o/3OEQJgwQCg0geNZu87IlskLFNbINGxKeLT/+cAn3n2 UYg9qIyVGSgUfjIvk5bLF0EA =Fr8V -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: Same messages?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Nick, On 24 January 2001 at 09:10:10 -0800 (which was 17:10 where I live) Nick Andriash wrote and made these points: NA I don't believe the fault lies with TB!. Here is an explanation I NA received from another List I'm on: L It is lazy SMTP Servers who do not bother to parse their Envelope L Addresses to remove Duplicates. When the message addressee list is L sorted so that the message can be cloned (one copy per domain), L the SMTP does not bother to parse the list as it is cloning and L ignore duplicates (which will sort together so it does not even L need to check the full list of addresses for the current domain - L only the last added to the cloned copy's Envelope list). For that to be the case, the TBUDL server would have to be capable of having duplicate names in the list to have originated duplicate messages in the first place. It is not. Lija has been talking to me off list and has sent me some examples. The messages in question were issued from this list. The list server is not capable of issuing more then one copy of a message to a subscriber at a single address. The messages have absolutely identical headers which implies that the split into two happened at the POP3 transaction end. It is more symptomatic of the connection with the POP3 server being lost before the DELE command was issued to remove the already received messages. This would leave the message on the server by accident and have it download a second time on the next connect and collect run. - -- Cheers -- .\\arck D. Pearlstone -- Moderator TBUDL / TBBETA / TBTECH [ PGP Key ID: 0x929DCDA0 | www: http://www.silverstones.com ] [Any opinions are my own and not those of RIT labs ] TB! v1.49c S/N 14F4B4B2 on Windows NT 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 1 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 6.5.8 Secured Comment: PGP Sealed for freshness iQA/AwUBOm8PKznkJKuSnc2gEQLuoQCfepYLzPIhGuoIYNim8TvpT9qkBO0An16i 7a6pptAqYj3Hids+htwpVALb =EqOT -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: Same messages?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On January 24, 2001, at 9:21:47 AM, Marck D. Pearlstone Wrote: MDP It is more symptomatic of the connection with the POP3 server being MDP lost before the DELE command was issued to remove the already MDP received messages. This would leave the message on the server by MDP accident and have it download a second time on the next connect and MDP collect run. Ok thanks Marck for the explanation. I am going to have to run that by my Cable ISP, because not only have I been getting numerous duplicates in a cross section of the Mailing Lists I'm on, but I also have many missing posts, both originals and replies. The missing posts I experience mostly on eGroups, still I don't know who to blame. :o( Nick N.J. Andriash [ TB! v1.49c | PGP 7.0.3 | Win 98 SE ] Vancouver, B.C. Canada | PGP Key ID: 0x7BA3FDCE -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 7.0.3 Comment: Join PGP-Basics: [EMAIL PROTECTED] iQA/AwUBOm8TjsUChHR7o/3OEQI67ACgvKt/kkRC2NFoF/tSlAXcRmDaWnAAmQEq OtcpZIOf54joo78PeMn0yzug =mckl -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: Same messages?
On Wednesday, January 24, 2001, 9:40:32 AM, Nick wrote: Ok thanks Marck for the explanation. I am going to have to run that by my Cable ISP, because not only have I been getting numerous duplicates in a cross section of the Mailing Lists I'm on, but I also have many missing posts, both originals and replies. The missing posts I experience mostly on eGroups, still I don't know who to blame. :o( My old cable modem ISP went bankrupt this month and ATT@Home is taking over, so I've been an @Home customer for the last few days. From what I read in athome.* newsgroups, the email service is extremely unreliable for (at least) some parts of the @Home network (so far most complaints I could see came from users in Michigan, Baltimore, Atlanta and some other American east coast cities). I don't know about the relationship between @Home in Canada and USA (whether they share the same backbone, or use the same email system or servers, etc.), but it might be the cause of your problem. So far, I haven't experiencing any problem with @Home's email service, but then, I haven't used it much. -- Best regards, Ming-Li The Bat! 1.49c | Win2k SP1 -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: Same messages?
On Wednesday, January 24, 2001, 9:21:47 AM, Marck wrote: It is more symptomatic of the connection with the POP3 server being lost before the DELE command was issued to remove the already received messages. This would leave the message on the server by accident and have it download a second time on the next connect and collect run. Does the same apply to situation where mail is left on server (for 1 day in my case). I've always left my mail on server for one day, but increasingly I've got duplicated mail recently. I know it could be due to connection problem, since my Internet connection has been less than ideal. Yet in the case where mail is left on the server, TB shouldn't download a message simply because it's still on the server. IOW, someone (TB or the server?) should remember which message has been downloaded and skip it next time. I've always thought it's TB's job, for I could set up a new clone account and re-retrieve all the mail left on the server, meaning the server doesn't know which has been downloaded, right? Where does the difficulty lies, then, for TB to remember which has been downloaded, when a connection is broken, except maybe the last one? It's not terribly serious, for the kill dupes in all folder command works wonder in TB. But I'm getting more and more complaints from my wife, so I guess it's time to ask. -- Best regards, Ming-Li The Bat! 1.49c | Win2k SP1 -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: Same messages?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Ming-Li, On 24 January 2001 at 10:46:26 -0800 (which was 18:46 where I live) Ming-Li wrote and made these points: ML Does the same apply to situation where mail is left on server (for ML 1 day in my case). I've always left my mail on server for one day, ML but increasingly I've got duplicated mail recently. No, it doesn't apply. I have been leaving my mail on the server for 0 days (that's until midnight, same day) and have received *no* dupes under that condition. My POP3/SMTP server is on the LAN here so I have next to no connection problem (he said, fresh from fixing a BNC cable in the lounge that had taken out the entire network g). I have had it that way for a couple of weeks and this evening I turned it off. At that point, I promptly re-received the days 200 messages :-). ML I know it could be due to connection problem, since my Internet ML connection has been less than ideal. Yet in the case where mail is ML left on the server, TB shouldn't download a message simply because ML it's still on the server. IOW, someone (TB or the server?) should ML remember which message has been downloaded and skip it next time. It does. ML I've always thought it's TB's job, for I could set up a new clone ML account and re-retrieve all the mail left on the server, meaning ML the server doesn't know which has been downloaded, right? Where ML does the difficulty lies, then, for TB to remember which has been ML downloaded, when a connection is broken, except maybe the last ML one? Because we're talking about a mail that TB believed it had deleted. The delete instruction never arrived at the server so the message stayed there and looked to TB like "fresh meat". ML It's not terribly serious, for the kill dupes in all folder ML command works wonder in TB. But I'm getting more and more ML complaints from my wife, so I guess it's time to ask. I could be wrong about this but I don't think that I am. I have received unexpected dupes in TB but they have certainly arrived at my server as dupes. In my case this is for yet another reason: I have two responsible SMTP relay gateways for my domain and messages should go to one or the other depending on geography and load. Sometimes (very rarely) a message ends up on *both* so I get two copies. The routing headers tell the tale though. - -- Cheers -- .\\arck D. Pearlstone -- Moderator TBUDL / TBBETA / TBTECH [ PGP Key ID: 0x929DCDA0 | www: http://www.silverstones.com ] [Any opinions are my own and not those of RIT labs ] TB! v1.49c S/N 14F4B4B2 on Windows NT 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 1 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 6.5.8 Secured Comment: PGP Sealed for freshness iQA/AwUBOm9hwznkJKuSnc2gEQIvNgCgkzzRkknHIUUkIZZeV9aq5s67xocAoMyJ +7CBqnDukXCdcucmr6CJ7aQQ =NbcN -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
RE: Same messages?
STOP SPAMING ME WITH THESE MESSAGES !!! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Marck D. Pearlstone Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 3:14 PM To: Ming-Li on TBUDL Subject: Re: Same messages? -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Ming-Li, On 24 January 2001 at 10:46:26 -0800 (which was 18:46 where I live) Ming-Li wrote and made these points: ML Does the same apply to situation where mail is left on server (for ML 1 day in my case). I've always left my mail on server for one day, ML but increasingly I've got duplicated mail recently. No, it doesn't apply. I have been leaving my mail on the server for 0 days (that's until midnight, same day) and have received *no* dupes under that condition. My POP3/SMTP server is on the LAN here so I have next to no connection problem (he said, fresh from fixing a BNC cable in the lounge that had taken out the entire network g). I have had it that way for a couple of weeks and this evening I turned it off. At that point, I promptly re-received the days 200 messages :-). ML I know it could be due to connection problem, since my Internet ML connection has been less than ideal. Yet in the case where mail is ML left on the server, TB shouldn't download a message simply because ML it's still on the server. IOW, someone (TB or the server?) should ML remember which message has been downloaded and skip it next time. It does. ML I've always thought it's TB's job, for I could set up a new clone ML account and re-retrieve all the mail left on the server, meaning ML the server doesn't know which has been downloaded, right? Where ML does the difficulty lies, then, for TB to remember which has been ML downloaded, when a connection is broken, except maybe the last ML one? Because we're talking about a mail that TB believed it had deleted. The delete instruction never arrived at the server so the message stayed there and looked to TB like "fresh meat". ML It's not terribly serious, for the kill dupes in all folder ML command works wonder in TB. But I'm getting more and more ML complaints from my wife, so I guess it's time to ask. I could be wrong about this but I don't think that I am. I have received unexpected dupes in TB but they have certainly arrived at my server as dupes. In my case this is for yet another reason: I have two responsible SMTP relay gateways for my domain and messages should go to one or the other depending on geography and load. Sometimes (very rarely) a message ends up on *both* so I get two copies. The routing headers tell the tale though. - -- Cheers -- .\\arck D. Pearlstone -- Moderator TBUDL / TBBETA / TBTECH [ PGP Key ID: 0x929DCDA0 | www: http://www.silverstones.com ] [Any opinions are my own and not those of RIT labs ] TB! v1.49c S/N 14F4B4B2 on Windows NT 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 1 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 6.5.8 Secured Comment: PGP Sealed for freshness iQA/AwUBOm9hwznkJKuSnc2gEQIvNgCgkzzRkknHIUUkIZZeV9aq5s67xocAoMyJ +7CBqnDukXCdcucmr6CJ7aQQ =NbcN -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: Same messages?
Hi Gary, On Wed, 24 Jan 2001, at 16:22:19 -0800 you wrote: GB STOP SPAMING ME WITH THESE MESSAGES !!! Before you start shouting at someone, you should perhaps read to the end of one of the mails you receive and click the unsubscribe link. That should solve your problems. It's quite normal to receive a lot of mails after subscribing to a mailing list :-) -- Regards, Lars The Bat! 1.49c on Windows NT 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 1 |Lars Geiger | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]| | PGP Key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=GetPublicKey | -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: Same messages?
Hello Nick, Historians believe that Wed, 24 Jan 2001 at 09:40:32 GMT -0800 was when, Nick Andriash [NA] typed the following: NA Ok thanks Marck for the explanation. I am going to have to run that by NA my Cable ISP, because not only have I been getting numerous duplicates NA in a cross section of the Mailing Lists I'm on, but I also have many NA missing posts, both originals and replies. The missing posts I NA experience mostly on eGroups, still I don't know who to blame. :o( I know the Vancouver @Home servers don't allow forwarding addresses to go to their accounts. Perhaps they have blackballed eGroups too. There are several good sites offering free POP3 access. Perhaps you should consider setting up such an account, at least for mailing lists. -- Thanks for writing, Januk Aggarwal Using The Bat! 1.49c under Windows 98 4.10 Build A Personal Plan: To avoid sanity, lucidity and wit at all costs. -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: Same messages?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On January 24, 2001, at 7:43:18 PM, Januk Aggarwal Wrote: JA I know the Vancouver @Home servers don't allow forwarding addresses to JA go to their accounts. Perhaps they have blackballed eGroups too. I don't believe so because I am receiving 95% of my eGroups Mailings. It's only *some* of those messages that are not getting through for some strange reason, and it's not just eGroups, but all my messages. Even test messages I send to myself may take 9 hours to get here, or they might arrive almost immediately. If I send one of those test messages to my [EMAIL PROTECTED] account from here, it arrives almost instantaneously. Does that sound like a POP3 or SMTP problem? JA There are several good sites offering free POP3 access. Perhaps you JA should consider setting up such an account, at least for mailing JA lists. But I feel the problem *is* with my POP3 Server, so I don't understand how having a Web Account with access to the Server will help at all. I have to contact, again, the @Home people and find out what is going on, but that has quickly become a never ending process. :o( Nick N.J. Andriash [ TB! v1.49c | PGP 7.0.3 | Win 98 SE ] Vancouver, B.C. Canada | PGP Key ID: 0x7BA3FDCE -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 7.0.3 Comment: Join PGP-Basics: [EMAIL PROTECTED] iQA/AwUBOm+0v8UChHR7o/3OEQJKLQCgwondErkv1gCUHq4c8vSIrACMMqoAoLXm FsXBo6YAMxtaHBHkv8AIjE5l =OaaB -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
