Re: Re(3): POP3 in Debian
On Vi, 20 ian 12, 17:28:29, peasth...@shaw.ca wrote: > > Never been too bothered with spam. Shaw offers filtration > and I leave it off. I wonder whether definite spams are > caught by Shaw or further upstream. Do I.S.P.s ever routinely check > for it in outgoing mail. In my experience both Gmail and GMX have some checks. I've been hit by this when bouncing list spam to report-listspam@l.d.o. > In any case, I just click away the few that arrive each day. Might > consider local filtering one day. You are lucky, I get 50 to 100 spams per day. Gmail does have pretty good filtering, but I do have occasional false negatives and even some false positives. Because of the false positives I do regularly check the Spam folder. > Incidentally, someone please have a look at > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_email_subject_abbreviations > section "Iteration of Reply" and point out any errors. It's > pertinent to http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMailingLists page. As far as I understand a mail client should add a "Re:" on the first reply, but otherwise leave the Subject alone. Some broken clients don't recognize the first "Re:" (due to case?) and add additional ones. Your messages are the very few I have ever seen to also add a number, which is why I just assumed either your client is broken or it is due to your complicated e-mail setup, but it seems to me that at least mutt knows how to deal with it: ,[ muttrc(5) ] | |reply_regexp | Type: regular expression | Default: “^(re([\[0-9\]+])*|aw):[ \t]*” | | A regular expression used to recognize reply messages when | threading and replying. The default value corresponds to the | English ”Re:” | and the German ”Aw:”. | ` However, I have no RFC to cite, this is just what I have seen on mailing lists and private mail. Kind regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Re(3): POP3 in Debian
On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 17:28:29 -0800, peasthope wrote: > * From: Camaleón * Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 > 21:46:22 + (UTC) >> I've reviewed the messages you have posted in this thread but haven't >> found a reference on what was your e-mail client :-? > > In "http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2012/01/msg01548.html"; the 4th > non-empty line of the body of the message has "Oberon Mail (ejz) on PC > Native 05.01.2003". I missed/bypassed that, sorry. Maybe because the change of the subject. > Then again near the bottom of the message, 4th non-empty line prior to > "Regards". I see. So did you finally reached to the conclusion that your MUA was the culprit here? Good :-) >> ... you miss one of the most useful tools for handling today's >> mailboxes -running your own spamassassin- unless your ISP has a good >> and fully customizable anti-spam filter. > > Never been too bothered with spam. Shaw offers filtration and I leave > it off. I wonder whether definite spams are caught by Shaw or further > upstream. Do I.S.P.s ever routinely check for it in outgoing mail. In > any case, I just click away the few that arrive each day. Might > consider local filtering one day. There are some ISPs that make a good job (when talking about effectiveness) with their spam filters (e.g., Gmail) but the problem is about configuration. The level of customization it allows a local anti- spam filter is very high and such flexibility can't be obtained with my Gmail account. So finally, what are you going to do or what are now your plans regarding your original issue? :-? > Incidentally, someone please have a look at > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_email_subject_abbreviations > section "Iteration of Reply" and point out any errors. It's pertinent > to http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMailingLists page. I've never heard about that. I mean, I'm not aware of any rule or recommendation for writing at the "subject" line, I've always thought it's "free-style" or based on the user's preferences. I think what mandates here are the header fields. What I can tell is that editing the subject line can make some MUAs (mostly webmails) break the threading style by removing the required references and/or reply-to headers. Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/jfe7mn$8j9$3...@dough.gmane.org
Re: Re(3): POP3 in Debian
On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 17:28:29 -0800 peasth...@shaw.ca wrote: > > Never been too bothered with spam. Shaw offers filtration > and I leave it off. I wonder whether definite spams are > caught by Shaw or further upstream. If their SMTP servers are checking for proper DNS and using blacklists, that will deal with almost all spam. If you're downloading only for legitimate recipients and not using a catch-all, that will take out almost all the rest. The overwhelmingly vast majority of spam is the NDR type, sent to deliberately non-existent recipient names. > Do I.S.P.s ever routinely > check for it in outgoing mail. Don't think so. About half the spam I get from from legitimate SMTP sending servers comes from Google and Yahoo. Yahoo in particular are right on the ball in stopping incoming spam, to the point of impeding people trying to send their customers technical IT instructions, but they don't seem to give a damn what their customers do. But most spam comes directly from compromised domestic computers, not through an ISP's smarthost, so DNS checks catch all that. Lots of small US ISPs (<1000 IP addresses) seem happy for their clients to send masses of spam, generally for legal but dubious products. If I get spam from a large company or university, I'll usually let them know, but these small ISPs go straight into the blacklist for the first offence. -- Joe -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120121100722.2c0d2...@jretrading.com
Re(3): POP3 in Debian
* From: Camaleón * Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 21:46:22 + (UTC) > I've reviewed the messages you have posted in this thread but haven't > found a reference on what was your e-mail client :-? In "http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2012/01/msg01548.html"; the 4th non-empty line of the body of the message has "Oberon Mail (ejz) on PC Native 05.01.2003". Then again near the bottom of the message, 4th non-empty line prior to "Regards". > ... you miss one of the most useful tools for handling today's > mailboxes -running your own spamassassin- unless your ISP has a good and > fully customizable anti-spam filter. Never been too bothered with spam. Shaw offers filtration and I leave it off. I wonder whether definite spams are caught by Shaw or further upstream. Do I.S.P.s ever routinely check for it in outgoing mail. In any case, I just click away the few that arrive each day. Might consider local filtering one day. Incidentally, someone please have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_email_subject_abbreviations section "Iteration of Reply" and point out any errors. It's pertinent to http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMailingLists page. Thanks, ... Peter E. -- Telephone 1 360 639 0202. bcc: peasthope ... shaw.ca "http://carnot.yi.org/"; "http://members.shaw.ca/peasthope/index.html#Itinerary"; -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/171057396.71453.30578@cantor.invalid
POP3 compliance; was Re(3): POP3 in Debian
* From: Osamu Aoki * Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 22:10:35 +0900 > The real question is who's bug is this. Oberon Mail (ejz) on PC Native 05.01.2003. Fixed and documented here. "http://carnot.yi.org/OberonPage.html#Mail"; > If this is bug on Debian ... Definitely not. Debian was only a possibility as a means of investigating the problem. > If this is non-RFC complient bug, maybe complain to ISP > or Zimbra POP3 server developer. Until last weekend the ISP POP3 server accepted "LIST 1", which doesn't comply to RFC 1939. I hadn't noticed which server was used but infer that last weekend they installed a new server or changed a flag in their Zimbra to strictly enforce the RFC. So without warning "LIST 1" was no longer accepted. In any case, I can't complain about enforcement of syntax. The MUAs in MS and *nix systems must have had the strict syntax all along; almost nobody noticed the change. > I think your usage of MUA is not a typical one. MUA is the acronym for Mail User Agent. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mail_user_agent > MUA is mutt, thunderbird, ... In my case "Oberon Mail (ejz) on PC Native 05.01.2003". > ... not POP3 server. Correct. The POP3 server is a Zimbra operated by my ISP, Shaw Cable. Regards, ... Peter E. -- Telephone 1 360 639 0202. bcc: peasthope ... shaw.ca "http://carnot.yi.org/"; "http://members.shaw.ca/peasthope/index.html#Itinerary"; -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/171057396.35481.30574@cantor.invalid
