On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 07:24:31AM -1000, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> * Roberto C. Sanchez [Mon, 28 Aug 2006 02:10:22 -0400]:
>
> > > Nope, that won't help. Knowing you use Mutt, and unless your MTA is
> > > configured in a quite restrictive way, this should solve your problems:
>
> > > % echo set e
* Roberto C. Sanchez [Mon, 28 Aug 2006 02:10:22 -0400]:
> > Nope, that won't help. Knowing you use Mutt, and unless your MTA is
> > configured in a quite restrictive way, this should solve your problems:
> > % echo set envelope_from=yes >>~/.muttrc
> That did it. Now, care to explain why/how?
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> On the other hand, I already tried to discuss that problem with you
> guys (alioth admin team) in May 2006; nothing really came out of
> it. Wichert questioned that it was a problem at all, I (tried to)
> explain why it was a problem, nothing further
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 08:59:21AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Aug 2006, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
>> accessible mail server. The point is that I only experience this
>> problem with Alioth and SourceForge lists, where they use braindead call
>> back mechanism to try and reach the
On Sun, Aug 27, 2006 at 05:37:00PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> Is the mailing list software on Alioth broken or misconfigured? If I
> send from any host on my network other than the one which happens to be
> the mail server, I get this error when I send to an Alioth list:
> Aug 27 17:26:48
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 06:48:31AM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> Out of curiousity, if this is such a good thing why are Alioth and
> SourceForge the only two services (of the dozens of mailing lists from
> half dozen or more services) which use this setup? Also, why is the
> error message r
On 8/28/06, Roberto C. Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
No offense, but that is completely non-scalable. That only works for a
small number of users which does not change frequently. Anyhow, thanks
to 'Dato, I seem to have been able to convince mutt to play nicer with
your mail server.
Yeah
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 08:59:21AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Aug 2006, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> > accessible mail server. The point is that I only experience this
> > problem with Alioth and SourceForge lists, where they use braindead call
> > back mechanism to try and reach th
On Aug 28, Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm an Alioth administrator. If you expect help from us, you'd better not
> say that our configuration is "braindead". This is the most basic thing
> that we can do to avoid spam.
It is not "braindead", but "antisocial".
"sender verification"
On Sun, 27 Aug 2006, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> accessible mail server. The point is that I only experience this
> problem with Alioth and SourceForge lists, where they use braindead call
> back mechanism to try and reach the host that originated the message.
I'm an Alioth administrator. If you
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 08:06:37AM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> * Roberto C. Sanchez [Mon, 28 Aug 2006 01:45:30 -0400]:
>
> > Interesting. My previous attempt at solving this was to have mutt
> > explicitly set the Return-Path header. However, it did not work. I
> > don't know if it was becaus
* Roberto C. Sanchez [Mon, 28 Aug 2006 01:45:30 -0400]:
> Interesting. My previous attempt at solving this was to have mutt
> explicitly set the Return-Path header. However, it did not work. I
> don't know if it was because postfix on my gateway host stripped it or
> rewrote it, or if it is jus
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 07:38:56AM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> * Martijn van Oosterhout [Mon, 28 Aug 2006 07:22:40 +0200]:
>
> > I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think it matters what domain, the
> > address just has to exist. I think that they're checking your Sender
> > header (which is where bo
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 07:22:40AM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
>
> I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think it matters what domain, the
> address just has to exist. I think that they're checking your Sender
> header (which is where bounces get sent) for validity. I remember
> dealing with thi
* Martijn van Oosterhout [Mon, 28 Aug 2006 07:22:40 +0200]:
> I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think it matters what domain, the
> address just has to exist. I think that they're checking your Sender
> header (which is where bounces get sent) for validity.
Almost. They're checking his envelope-from
On 8/28/06, Roberto C. Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What the message suggests to me is that the other machines in your
> domain should be using address rewriting if they are sending from
> unroutable addresses.
Except that there are multiple domains hosted from my network. Which
should
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 02:18:12AM +0100, Stephen Gran wrote:
> This one time, at band camp, Roberto C. Sanchez said:
> > Is the mailing list software on Alioth broken or misconfigured? If I
> > send from any host on my network other than the one which happens to be
> > the mail server, I get this
This one time, at band camp, Roberto C. Sanchez said:
> Is the mailing list software on Alioth broken or misconfigured? If I
> send from any host on my network other than the one which happens to be
> the mail server, I get this error when I send to an Alioth list:
>
> Aug 27 17:26:48 santiago po
Is the mailing list software on Alioth broken or misconfigured? If I
send from any host on my network other than the one which happens to be
the mail server, I get this error when I send to an Alioth list:
Aug 27 17:26:48 santiago postfix/smtp[23682]: 4A8002403D:
to=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
relay=lis
19 matches
Mail list logo
