Re: [Mailman-Users] Executive summary of DMARC issues

[Mark Sapiro]

On 05/15/2014 08:35 AM, Gary Algier wrote:
> 
> However, the
> mailing list software will use an envelope address from the list so SPF
> should not fail.


SPF won't fail, but for DMARC purposes, the domain of the Envelope
sender that passes SPF will not "align" with the From: domain, so the
fact that SPF is OK doesn't help.

-- 
Mark Sapiro The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Postings being discarded due to DKIM failures?

[Robert Heller]

At Thu, 15 May 2014 18:36:05 -0700 Mark Sapiro  wrote:

> 
> On 05/15/2014 05:38 PM, Robert Heller wrote:
> > 
> > It wasn't any of these. I believe I have figured out what happened. The 
> > poster
> > did something 'bad': instead of creating a fresh message he located an old
> > message with a return address of the list and did a reply and then edited
> > *some* of the headers: only some of the  'visible' ones and did not delete 
> > the 
> > 'hidden' ones,  which confused the list server. 
> > 
> > I discovered this when saw dkim log messages suggesting that the server the 
> > message came from might be pretending to be my server and then when I 
> > looked 
> > at the headers of another message from this poster that had headers it 
> > should 
> > not have had.
> 
> 
> The only header that should cause an automatic discard is X-BeenThere:
> with the list's posting address. MUA's will normally not copy this into
> a 'reply', so the poster must have generated the reply in some other way
> like 'bounce' or 'remail' to the list.

I don't know *exactly* what he did, but 'bounce' or 'remail' are probably 
likely. I suspect it is a case of having learned how to use a hammer, it was 
easier to just use a hammer for everything, not just nails, but screws, nuts, 
bolts, etc. :-)  The poster is now investigating the new world of the 'address 
book' as a way of keeping track of possible addresses to use to send 
messages...

> 

-- 
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / hel...@deepsoft.com
Deepwoods Software-- http://www.deepsoft.com/
()  ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   -- against proprietary attachments


  
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Postings being discarded due to DKIM failures?

[Mark Sapiro]

On 05/15/2014 05:38 PM, Robert Heller wrote:
> 
> It wasn't any of these. I believe I have figured out what happened. The poster
> did something 'bad': instead of creating a fresh message he located an old
> message with a return address of the list and did a reply and then edited
> *some* of the headers: only some of the  'visible' ones and did not delete 
> the 
> 'hidden' ones,  which confused the list server. 
> 
> I discovered this when saw dkim log messages suggesting that the server the 
> message came from might be pretending to be my server and then when I looked 
> at the headers of another message from this poster that had headers it should 
> not have had.


The only header that should cause an automatic discard is X-BeenThere:
with the list's posting address. MUA's will normally not copy this into
a 'reply', so the poster must have generated the reply in some other way
like 'bounce' or 'remail' to the list.

-- 
Mark Sapiro The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Dealing with rate limiting from Roadrunner/Time Warner

[Conrad G T Yoder]

On May 15, 2014, at 8:48 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull  wrote:

> Conrad G T Yoder writes:
> 
>>> Are these true bounces (ie, permanent delivery failures) or just the
>>> temporary failures due to rate limiting, causing delays of many hours
>>> or days in delivery?
>> 
>> It is a true bounce - mail is being rejected.  The error message is
>> phrased as a "temporary failure," but the message is bounced at the
>> SMTP transaction.  “At some point,” they stop bouncing.  RR won’t
>> say when that happens.
> 
> The log you display is not a true bounce.  If your host's MTA is
> configured properly, you may get DSNs saying that you don't need to do
> anything but wait, but your users' bounce counts are not increasing
> due to messages like the one below, and they probably are eventually
> being delivered (although that can't be determined from the log below).

Gotcha.  I guess someone thought it was a true bounce and configured their 
servers appropriately. :^)


> The only effective measures you can take that I can see based on what
> you have written so far are (1) find a competent and responsive host
> for your list (there may not be any, though; I'm not sure what to do
> to get reliable timely delivery to a system like Roadrunner), or
> (2) tell your Roadrunner subscribers that their host is incapable of
> supporting reliable mail delivery and that you can't do anything; if
> they care about reliable delivery of mailing lists including yours,
> they should use an address at a competent provider (GMail is the only
> competent and approximately socially responsible freemail provider I
> know of).

I will certainly be encouraging people with RR addresses to switch.  

I have not yet tried the nuclear option - the infamous EECB (Executive Email 
Carpet Bomb).  This of course should only be used when all other options have 
been exhausted.  I’ll probably end up doing it with the Time Warner people.  I 
did it a few years ago when I was (having no success) going through the usual 
channels of AOL marking mailing list email as spam.  Within 2 hours of the EECB 
I got a call from one of their Anti-Spam Operations team members, and she gave 
me her direct phone number and email address at that point for any future 
needed correspondence.  Things started happening then.

-Conrad

--
Truth is information.

--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Virtual Mailman broke!

[Jan Steinman]

> From: Mark Sapiro 
> 
> On 05/14/2014 04:26 PM, Jan Steinman wrote:
>> I'm using the Mailman and postfix that came bundled with MacOS X 10.6 (Snow 
>> Leopard) on a Mac Mini Server.
> 
> See the FAQ at . Yes, I know you probably
> can't get help from Apple, but Apple's Mailman is known to be patched in
> ways we have little or no knowledge of, and this affects the help we can
> give you.

>> I have problems adding new lists using the web interface. It's been a 
>> problem forever, but I've forgotten the magic fixes to magic files that I've 
>> done in the past to correct it.

Thanks for your patient questions, Mark.

When I said I'd been there before, I realized I should search the mailman-users 
list archive, and there it was!

I used the mailman web form to create the new list, and the initial symptom is 
that email to that new address bounces with "address unknown" error.

After manually adding the new list to /var/mailman/data "aliases" and 
"virtual-mailman" to look like the other functioning lists, I ran "postmap 
virtual-mailman" and "newaliases".

When I went searching through archives for virtual mailman problems and my 
name, I found a posting that said I needed to run "postalias aliases" in that 
directory. I did so, and now all is well.

Yes, Apple's implementation appears to be badly broken.

I'm saving this email as text in the /var/mailman/data directory and the 
/etc/postfix directories, to save myself some pain the next time it happens... 
:-)

 Jan Steinman, EcoReality Co-op 

--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Executive summary of DMARC issues

[Matthew Needham]

On May 14, 2014, at 22:47 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull 
mailto:step...@xemacs.org>> wrote:

If distribution lists are pure forwards, MS365 will be OK.  But I find
it hard to believe that that level of functionality is popular with
users -- there's a reason why all popular MLMs implement subject
prefixes, body headers and body footers, and it isn't "because it's
the Microsoft way".

Exchange Online (standalone or as part of Office 365) really does lack most of 
the basic mailing list functionality. It does have moderation, but no subject 
tagging, list footer, etc. I believe the main reason distribution groups get 
used is because of the integration with Outlook and compatibility with Exchange 
Calendaring (inviting a Mailman list to a meeting is bad). It is limited, but 
in many cases is “good enough”, and many people don’t know what they’re missing.

Here’s a table comparing select features of the two:

[cid:2EBFB349-BF05-4E11-BED3-DCE3885C4D60@hdfgroup.uiuc.edu]


--

Matthew Needham
mneed...@hdfgroup.org
217-531-6110

The HDF Group
1800 South Oak Street, Suite 203
Champaign, IL 61820

--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Dealing with rate limiting from Roadrunner/Time Warner

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Conrad G T Yoder writes:

 > > Are these true bounces (ie, permanent delivery failures) or just the
 > > temporary failures due to rate limiting, causing delays of many hours
 > > or days in delivery?
 > 
 > It is a true bounce - mail is being rejected.  The error message is
 > phrased as a "temporary failure," but the message is bounced at the
 > SMTP transaction.  “At some point,” they stop bouncing.  RR won’t
 > say when that happens.

The log you display is not a true bounce.  If your host's MTA is
configured properly, you may get DSNs saying that you don't need to do
anything but wait, but your users' bounce counts are not increasing
due to messages like the one below, and they probably are eventually
being delivered (although that can't be determined from the log below).

 > : delivery temporarily suspended: host
 >cdptpa-pub-iedge-vip.email.rr.com[107.14.166.70] refused to talk to me: 
 > 421
 >4.7.1 - Connection refused - <66.33.216.56> -  Too many concurrent
 >connections ( <2> ) from source IP

This is absolutely clearly with no doubt whatsoever a problem that
only can be resolved by reconfiguring the MTA at one end or the other.
I gather that your MTA is a DreamHost responsibility, so they are
either amazingly incompetent or lying to you.  I don't blame them for
not wanting to deal with it, by the way, only for trying to blame the
victims (you and your Roadrunner subscribers).  Roadrunner's policy is
brain-damaged, DreamHost's is merely pragmatic (it's very costly to
try to work around a peer site's brain damage).

The only effective measures you can take that I can see based on what
you have written so far are (1) find a competent and responsive host
for your list (there may not be any, though; I'm not sure what to do
to get reliable timely delivery to a system like Roadrunner), or
(2) tell your Roadrunner subscribers that their host is incapable of
supporting reliable mail delivery and that you can't do anything; if
they care about reliable delivery of mailing lists including yours,
they should use an address at a competent provider (GMail is the only
competent and approximately socially responsible freemail provider I
know of).

 > > This may be partly true, if you are falling afoul of the "too many
 > > recipients per message" limit.
 > 
 > I will probably turn that on soon - it is available to me.

This probably won't help, because based on the message above your MTA
will helpfully just execute the deliveries in parallel, and you'll get
*more* delivery failures, not less.

 > On this instance, they haven’t been very helpful.  For the most
 > part, though, they have been decent.  The largest of my lists that
 > I admin has over 7600 subscribers, with about 15 emails going out
 > daily - that’s about 115K total emails a day, and for the price I
 > am paying DH, I haven’t found anywhere near a better deal.  So I
 > accept these (occasional) issues along with the deal I’m getting.

This issue doesn't look "occasional" to me.  However, if what is most
likely a permanent inability to achieve timely delivery to subscribers
at Roadrunner is acceptable to you, I don't have any complaints. :-/

Steve


--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Postings being discarded due to DKIM failures?

[Robert Heller]

At Thu, 15 May 2014 17:14:38 -0700 Mark Sapiro  wrote:

> 
> On 05/15/2014 08:43 AM, Robert Heller wrote:
> > A list member recently tried to post a message to a list and the message 
> > was 
> > discarded for no *appearent* reason.  The only clue is that for some reason 
> > the message is failing the DKIM check (DKIM=fail).  I am using Mailman 
> > 2.1.16 
> > on CentOS 5 (python-2.4.3-56.el5, httpd-2.2.3-85.el5.centos, 
> > dkim-milter-2.8.3-8.el5).  Is there some way to get Mailman to log why it 
> > is 
> > discarding messages?
> 
> 
> I assume you've seen the vette log entry saying the message was
> discarded, but it doesn't say why.
> 
> Essentially all discards are because the message met some condition for
> which the action is Discard. These are all in the list's web admin
> interface. The most common one is Content filtering with a filter_action
> of discard and a message whose top level Content-Type: is either in
> filter_mime_types or not in pass_mime_types. This could be, e.g., a
> multipart/related message with multipart/alternative and multipart/mixed
> as the only multipart types in pass_mime_types or a text/html message
> without text/html in pass_mime_types. It is a common misconception that
> convert_html_to_plaintext will handle the latter, but you have to accept
> the HTML before you can convert it.
> 
> Other places to look for Discard actions are:
> 
> Privacy options...
> Sender filters
> member_moderation_action
> dmarc_moderation_action (Mailman 2.1.18 and up)
> discard_these_nonmembers
> generic_nonmember_action
> Spam filters
> header_filter_rules
> 
> If you want to see the reason and the message, change the action from
> Discard to Hold.

It wasn't any of these. I believe I have figured out what happened. The poster
did something 'bad': instead of creating a fresh message he located an old
message with a return address of the list and did a reply and then edited
*some* of the headers: only some of the  'visible' ones and did not delete the 
'hidden' ones,  which confused the list server. 

I discovered this when saw dkim log messages suggesting that the server the 
message came from might be pretending to be my server and then when I looked 
at the headers of another message from this poster that had headers it should 
not have had.

> 

-- 
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / hel...@deepsoft.com
Deepwoods Software-- http://www.deepsoft.com/
()  ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   -- against proprietary attachments


  
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] reply_goes_to_list broken in 2.1.18-1?

[Mark Sapiro]

On 05/15/2014 08:58 AM, Gibbs, David wrote:
> 
> You can see the headers from a test message I sent when tracking down the 
> problem here: http://code.midrange.com/ab8c5f0363.html


It appears there are two incomplete sets of headers there. Lines 1-22
with some of the headers (Received: headers at least omitted) from a
message from 2.1.18-1 and lines 26-47 with some headers from a message
from 2.1.17 and the 2.1.17 headers include Reply-To: and 2.1.18-1's do not.

Unfortunately, there's nothing there that helps me understand the cause
of the issue.

-- 
Mark Sapiro The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Postings being discarded due to DKIM failures?

[Mark Sapiro]

On 05/15/2014 08:43 AM, Robert Heller wrote:
> A list member recently tried to post a message to a list and the message was 
> discarded for no *appearent* reason.  The only clue is that for some reason 
> the message is failing the DKIM check (DKIM=fail).  I am using Mailman 2.1.16 
> on CentOS 5 (python-2.4.3-56.el5, httpd-2.2.3-85.el5.centos, 
> dkim-milter-2.8.3-8.el5).  Is there some way to get Mailman to log why it is 
> discarding messages?


I assume you've seen the vette log entry saying the message was
discarded, but it doesn't say why.

Essentially all discards are because the message met some condition for
which the action is Discard. These are all in the list's web admin
interface. The most common one is Content filtering with a filter_action
of discard and a message whose top level Content-Type: is either in
filter_mime_types or not in pass_mime_types. This could be, e.g., a
multipart/related message with multipart/alternative and multipart/mixed
as the only multipart types in pass_mime_types or a text/html message
without text/html in pass_mime_types. It is a common misconception that
convert_html_to_plaintext will handle the latter, but you have to accept
the HTML before you can convert it.

Other places to look for Discard actions are:

Privacy options...
Sender filters
member_moderation_action
dmarc_moderation_action (Mailman 2.1.18 and up)
discard_these_nonmembers
generic_nonmember_action
Spam filters
header_filter_rules

If you want to see the reason and the message, change the action from
Discard to Hold.

-- 
Mark Sapiro The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Get newer version of Mailman for Debian 6?

[Bruce Harrison]

I'd be interested as well.

Bruce Harrison
UT Martin

-Original Message-
From: Mailman-Users [mailto:mailman-users-bounces+harrison=utm@python.org] 
On Behalf Of Terry Earley
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 11:40 AM
To: mailman-users@python.org
Subject: Re: [Mailman-Users] Get newer version of Mailman for Debian 6?

Barry,

> It took me a while to determine what to do, but after I had built and 
> tested the package, I had no problems building packages for subsequent 
> Mailman releases.  IIRC, the last Mailman for which I built a package 
> was 2.1.14.  I do not know if any changes since then would require 
> changes to the package-build process.  I have details on what I did, 
> if anyone is interested.
>

Our Ubuntu server will need to take an upgrade from 2.1.14 to 2.1.18-1, so your 
instructions on building Debian packages will be very helpful to us at least. 
Thanks in advance.

Terry Earley
801 810-4175
Donate to FitEyes 


On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 10:32 AM, Barry S. Finkel  wrote:

> On 5/14/2014 2:40 PM, Sascha Rissel wrote:
>
>> Hello there,
>>
>> I am running a vServer on Debian6.
>> Via "apt-get install mailman" I installed and set up Mailman 2.1.13, 
>> which is running fine with 5 mailing lists on my server.
>>
>> Motivated by all those discussions about Yahoo's DMARC on this list, 
>> I wondered whether I can upgrade my Mailman installation to a newer version.
>>
>> I tried "apt-get update" and "apt-get upgrade" but I did not receive 
>> a newer version of Mailman.
>>
>> Unfortunately I don't consider myself as good enough in Linux usage, 
>> to be able to build Mailman binaries from scratch on my own. Indeed I 
>> tried, but already upon executing "configure" (Step 3 in Mailman's 
>> installation
>> guide)
>> I got a python warning
>>
>>> Distutils is not available or is incomplete
>>>
>> which seems to tell me I should install another Python environment.
>>
>> So I came to the point when I decided that compiling Mailman on my 
>> own is too complicated for me, because in the end I definitely want a 
>> bug-free installation of Mailman.
>>
>> Is there maybe an easier way to get a more recent version of Mailman 
>> for my server?
>>
>> In advance, thanks for your help!
>> Sascha.
>>
>
> When I was running a Mailman server on an Ubuntu box, I was forced to 
> install via a package.  But I did some research on the Debian/Ubuntu 
> package to see what was in it.  There were many patches that were 
> undocumented, and there was one patch that deleted a library that, in 
> some cases, is required.  So, I decided to build my own package from 
> the SourceForge source.  That way, I would know EXACTLY what the 
> source was, and I could get support from this discussion list.
>
> It took me a while to determine what to do, but after I had built and 
> tested the package, I had no problems building packages for subsequent 
> Mailman releases.  IIRC, the last Mailman for which I built a package 
> was 2.1.14.  I do not know if any changes since then would require 
> changes to the package-build process.  I have details on what I did, 
> if anyone is interested.
>
> --Barry Finkel
>
>
> --
> Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org 
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
> Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: 
> http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: 
> http://www.mail-archive.com/ mailman-users%40python.org/
> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/
> terry%40fiteyes.com
>
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: 
http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: 
http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/harrison%40utm.edu


--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Get newer version of Mailman for Debian 6?

[Terry Earley]

Barry,

> It took me a while to determine what to do,
> but after I had built and tested the package, I had no problems
> building packages for subsequent Mailman releases.  IIRC, the last
> Mailman for which I built a package was 2.1.14.  I do not know if
> any changes since then would require changes to the package-build
> process.  I have details on what I did, if anyone is interested.
>

Our Ubuntu server will need to take an upgrade from 2.1.14 to 2.1.18-1, so
your instructions on building Debian packages will be very helpful to us at
least. Thanks in advance.

Terry Earley
801 810-4175
Donate to FitEyes 


On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 10:32 AM, Barry S. Finkel  wrote:

> On 5/14/2014 2:40 PM, Sascha Rissel wrote:
>
>> Hello there,
>>
>> I am running a vServer on Debian6.
>> Via "apt-get install mailman" I installed and set up Mailman 2.1.13, which
>> is running fine with 5 mailing lists on my server.
>>
>> Motivated by all those discussions about Yahoo's DMARC on this list, I
>> wondered whether I can upgrade my Mailman installation to a newer version.
>>
>> I tried "apt-get update" and "apt-get upgrade" but I did not receive a
>> newer version of Mailman.
>>
>> Unfortunately I don't consider myself as good enough in Linux usage, to be
>> able to build Mailman binaries from scratch on my own. Indeed I tried, but
>> already upon executing "configure" (Step 3 in Mailman's installation
>> guide)
>> I got a python warning
>>
>>> Distutils is not available or is incomplete
>>>
>> which seems to tell me I should install another Python environment.
>>
>> So I came to the point when I decided that compiling Mailman on my own is
>> too complicated for me, because in the end I definitely want a bug-free
>> installation of Mailman.
>>
>> Is there maybe an easier way to get a more recent version of Mailman for
>> my
>> server?
>>
>> In advance, thanks for your help!
>> Sascha.
>>
>
> When I was running a Mailman server on an Ubuntu box, I was forced to
> install via a package.  But I did some research on the Debian/Ubuntu
> package to see what was in it.  There were many patches that were
> undocumented, and there was one patch that deleted a library that,
> in some cases, is required.  So, I decided to build my own package
> from the SourceForge source.  That way, I would know EXACTLY what
> the source was, and I could get support from this discussion list.
>
> It took me a while to determine what to do,
> but after I had built and tested the package, I had no problems
> building packages for subsequent Mailman releases.  IIRC, the last
> Mailman for which I built a package was 2.1.14.  I do not know if
> any changes since then would require changes to the package-build
> process.  I have details on what I did, if anyone is interested.
>
> --Barry Finkel
>
>
> --
> Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
> Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
> Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
> Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/
> mailman-users%40python.org/
> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/
> terry%40fiteyes.com
>
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Get newer version of Mailman for Debian 6?

[Barry S. Finkel]

On 5/14/2014 2:40 PM, Sascha Rissel wrote:

Hello there,

I am running a vServer on Debian6.
Via "apt-get install mailman" I installed and set up Mailman 2.1.13, which
is running fine with 5 mailing lists on my server.

Motivated by all those discussions about Yahoo's DMARC on this list, I
wondered whether I can upgrade my Mailman installation to a newer version.

I tried "apt-get update" and "apt-get upgrade" but I did not receive a
newer version of Mailman.

Unfortunately I don't consider myself as good enough in Linux usage, to be
able to build Mailman binaries from scratch on my own. Indeed I tried, but
already upon executing "configure" (Step 3 in Mailman's installation
guide)
I got a python warning

Distutils is not available or is incomplete

which seems to tell me I should install another Python environment.

So I came to the point when I decided that compiling Mailman on my own is
too complicated for me, because in the end I definitely want a bug-free
installation of Mailman.

Is there maybe an easier way to get a more recent version of Mailman for my
server?

In advance, thanks for your help!
Sascha.


When I was running a Mailman server on an Ubuntu box, I was forced to
install via a package.  But I did some research on the Debian/Ubuntu
package to see what was in it.  There were many patches that were
undocumented, and there was one patch that deleted a library that,
in some cases, is required.  So, I decided to build my own package
from the SourceForge source.  That way, I would know EXACTLY what
the source was, and I could get support from this discussion list.

It took me a while to determine what to do,
but after I had built and tested the package, I had no problems
building packages for subsequent Mailman releases.  IIRC, the last
Mailman for which I built a package was 2.1.14.  I do not know if
any changes since then would require changes to the package-build
process.  I have details on what I did, if anyone is interested.

--Barry Finkel

--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] reply_goes_to_list broken in 2.1.18-1?

[Gibbs, David]

On 5/15/2014 10:11 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 05/15/2014 07:39 AM, Gibbs, David wrote:
>> 
>> The upgrade went fine ... but after running for a bit some of my
>> users told me that when they replied to a list message it was going
>> to the author of the message they are replying to instead of the
>> list.  The Reply-to header was *NOT* present in the messages being
>> sent from the list.
> 
> Is this with or without DMARC Munge From or Wrap Message?

Although I was testing the DMARC Munge from functionality on a test list, the 
problem with the Reply-to header was occurring on all my lists.  None of the 
lists had the DMARC munge settings enabled.

> I've just tested most combinations, and they all include a Reply-To: 
> header with the list posting address. With Munge From and Wrap
> Message, the Reply-To: also has the original From: address in it, but
> it's always there.
> 
> Also, are you looking at a raw message or what a mail client
> displays? I've seen issues with some versions of Apple Mail and
> perhaps other clients where for "some" messages, the Reply-To: is not
> displayed or honored even though it's there.

I was looking at the raw header from tbird.

> I know reply_goes_to_list is This List, but what are the exact
> settings for from_is_list, anonymous_list and first_strip_reply_to
> when you see this?

For the list where I first noticed the problem:
from_is_list = No
anonymous_list = No
first_strip_reply_to = yes

These are the settings this list has had for years.

Unfortunately I no longer have the messages when I noticed the problem ... I 
will have to try and recreate the problem in a sandbox.

You can see the headers from a test message I sent when tracking down the 
problem here: http://code.midrange.com/ab8c5f0363.html

david


-- 
IBM i on Power Systems: For when you can't afford to be out of business!

I'm riding a metric century (100 km / 62 miles) in the 2014 Chicagoland Tour de 
Cure to raise money for diabetes research, education, and advocacy.  Sponsor me 
by visiting http://email.diabetessucks.net. Any amount is appreciated.

See where I get my donations from ... visit 
http://email.diabetessucks.net/mapdonations.php for an interactive map (it's a 
geeky thing).

--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

[Mailman-Users] Postings being discarded due to DKIM failures?

[Robert Heller]

A list member recently tried to post a message to a list and the message was 
discarded for no *appearent* reason.  The only clue is that for some reason 
the message is failing the DKIM check (DKIM=fail).  I am using Mailman 2.1.16 
on CentOS 5 (python-2.4.3-56.el5, httpd-2.2.3-85.el5.centos, 
dkim-milter-2.8.3-8.el5).  Is there some way to get Mailman to log why it is 
discarding messages?

-- 
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / hel...@deepsoft.com
Deepwoods Software-- http://www.deepsoft.com/
()  ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   -- against proprietary attachments


 
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Executive summary of DMARC issues

[Gary Algier]

On 05/15/14 11:15, Larry Finch wrote:


On May 15, 2014, at 10:53 AM, Gary Algier  wrote:


On 05/14/14 23:47, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:

I then sent an email to the list and to my work sendmail address.  It was 
delivered to both work addresses and the iCloud address.

Gmail put it in my Spam folder with the warning:
---
Be careful with this message. Our systems couldn't verify that this message was 
really sent by yahoo.com. You might want to avoid clicking links or replying 
with personal information.
---
There is also a link to their "Why messages are marked as Spam" page.

On Yahoo I found the bounce in my Spam folder with the following:
---
This is an automated message from the Extensible Content Security
at host wg.ulticom.com.

The message returned below could not be delivered to its intended
destinations.


It seems that in the case of a simple Exchange distribution list, the Yahoo 
members will fail (into their Spam folder!), some others may fail depending 
upon their service's SPF fussiness, and others may have to root around in their 
Spam folders for the content.



On the lists that I manage on listserv I’ve discovered that many ISPs honor Yahoo 
and AOL’s p=reject, and will not even put the message in the spam folder. Among 
them are: Comcast, SBCGlobal, AT&T, AOL, Rogers, Earthlink, Hotmail and a few 
others I don’t recall. So essentially half of my list members will not get posts 
from Yahoo or AOL.

best regards,
Larry

--
Larry Finch
finc...@portadmiral.org


Apparently, simple Exchange distribution lists do not rewrite headers or touch 
the body so DKIM passes.  However, the distribution lists also do not change 
the envelope sender so the SPF fails.  In order to get through DKIM, the 
internal author address ("From: ") and a bunch of other headers must stay the 
same, which Exchange does.  Most mailing list software rewrites something, 
which makes DKIM fail.  However, the mailing list software will use an 
envelope address from the list so SPF should not fail.


Summary:
Can't use Exchange distribution lists: SPF will fail.
Can't use mailing list software without changing the author, etc.: DKIM will 
fail.

Time for sendmail aliases?  Or perhaps, SPF will fail?

--
Gary Algier, WB2FWZg...@ulticom.com +1 856 787 2758
Ulticom Inc., 1020 Briggs Rd, Mt. Laurel, NJ 08054 Fax:+1 856 866 2033

Nielsen's First Law of Computer Manuals:
People don't read documentation voluntarily.
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] reply_goes_to_list broken in 2.1.18-1?

[Mark Sapiro]

On 05/15/2014 07:39 AM, Gibbs, David wrote:
> 
> The upgrade went fine ... but after running for a bit some of my users told 
> me that when they replied to a list message it was going to the author of the 
> message they are replying to instead of the list.  The Reply-to header was 
> *NOT* present in the messages being sent from the list.
> 
> I have reply_goes_to_list set to "This List" for all my lists.
> 
> I down graded to 2.1.17 again and the reply-to header was once again in place.
> 
> Is this a known issue?


Is this with or without DMARC Munge From or Wrap Message?

I've just tested most combinations, and they all include a Reply-To:
header with the list posting address. With Munge From and Wrap Message,
the Reply-To: also has the original From: address in it, but it's always
there.

Also, are you looking at a raw message or what a mail client displays?
I've seen issues with some versions of Apple Mail and perhaps other
clients where for "some" messages, the Reply-To: is not displayed or
honored even though it's there.

I know reply_goes_to_list is This List, but what are the exact settings
for from_is_list, anonymous_list and first_strip_reply_to when you see this?

-- 
Mark Sapiro The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Executive summary of DMARC issues

[Larry Finch]

On May 15, 2014, at 10:53 AM, Gary Algier  wrote:

> On 05/14/14 23:47, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> 
> I then sent an email to the list and to my work sendmail address.  It was 
> delivered to both work addresses and the iCloud address.
> 
> Gmail put it in my Spam folder with the warning:
> ---
> Be careful with this message. Our systems couldn't verify that this message 
> was really sent by yahoo.com. You might want to avoid clicking links or 
> replying with personal information.
> ---
> There is also a link to their "Why messages are marked as Spam" page.
> 
> On Yahoo I found the bounce in my Spam folder with the following:
> ---
> This is an automated message from the Extensible Content Security
> at host wg.ulticom.com.
> 
> The message returned below could not be delivered to its intended
> destinations.
> 
> 
> It seems that in the case of a simple Exchange distribution list, the Yahoo 
> members will fail (into their Spam folder!), some others may fail depending 
> upon their service's SPF fussiness, and others may have to root around in 
> their Spam folders for the content.
> 

On the lists that I manage on listserv I’ve discovered that many ISPs honor 
Yahoo and AOL’s p=reject, and will not even put the message in the spam folder. 
Among them are: Comcast, SBCGlobal, AT&T, AOL, Rogers, Earthlink, Hotmail and a 
few others I don’t recall. So essentially half of my list members will not get 
posts from Yahoo or AOL.

best regards,
Larry

--
Larry Finch
finc...@portadmiral.org



--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Executive summary of DMARC issues

[Gary Algier]

On 05/14/14 23:47, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:

Peter Shute writes:

  > When MS365 forwards the mails sent to the distribution list, should
  > that make the DMARC authentication fail? I thought that only
  > happened if you made changes like adding a prefix to the subject
  > line like Mailman does.

If it forwards verbatim *and* the sending domain signs the mail with
DKIM (the common case), DMARC validation will succeed.  Without DKIM,
DMARC validation is guaranteed to fail.  However, even in the sender
uses DKIM, *any* change *whatsoever* to the body will cause validation
to fail, and there are several changes to the header that could cause
it to fail.  Furthermore, which parts of the header are protected by
the DKIM signature are determined by the sender, not by DMARC AFAIK.

If distribution lists are pure forwards, MS365 will be OK.  But I find
it hard to believe that that level of functionality is popular with
users -- there's a reason why all popular MLMs implement subject
prefixes, body headers and body footers, and it isn't "because it's
the Microsoft way".



I ran some tests this morning.  I created an Exchange distribution list here 
and added myself five ways on the list:

1. On our Exchange server (how I receive internal emails)
2. On a local Linux server running sendmail and dovecot (how I receive "real 
mail")

3. A Yahoo address.
4. A Gmail address.
5. An iCloud address.

I then sent an email to the list and to my work sendmail address.  It was 
delivered to both work addresses and the iCloud address.


Gmail put it in my Spam folder with the warning:
---
Be careful with this message. Our systems couldn't verify that this message 
was really sent by yahoo.com. You might want to avoid clicking links or 
replying with personal information.

---
There is also a link to their "Why messages are marked as Spam" page.

On Yahoo I found the bounce in my Spam folder with the following:
---
This is an automated message from the Extensible Content Security
at host wg.ulticom.com.

The message returned below could not be delivered to its intended
destinations.

For further assistance, please send mail to .

If you do so, please include this problem report. You can delete
your own text from the message returned below.

Reason:
: host mta7.am0.yahoodns.net[98.138.112.34] said: 554
5.7.9 Message not accepted for policy reasons.  See
http://postmaster.yahoo.com/errors/postmaster-28.html (in reply to end of
DATA command)
---
The server wg.ulticom.com is our WatchGuard Anti-Spam appliance.  It had no 
trouble accepting it when it came in the first time (it does not do DMARC 
checks), but when it tried to delivery the email to Yahoo, they rejected it. 
Of course, the reject went to Yahoo anyway, but with a MAILER-DAEMON sender 
address.


I saved the two copies from my sendmail address and compared them:
% h=$(sed -n -e 'y/:/|/' -e '/DKIM-Signature|/s/.* h=\([^;]*\).*/\1/p' 
direct.eml)
% diff -s -u <(egrep -i "^($h):" direct.eml) <(egrep -i "^($h)" list.eml)
Files /dev/fd/4 and /dev/fd/5 are identical
% diff -s -u <(sed '1,/^$/d' direct.eml) <(sed '1,/^$/d' list.eml)
Files /dev/fd/4 and /dev/fd/5 are identical

The first diff compares only the headers in the DKIM Signature.
The second diff compares the body.
The DKIM checks seem to be good.  So, it seems that nothing has changed in the 
content or checked header.  It must be SPf.


% dig +short TXT _spf.mail.yahoo.com
"v=spf1 ptr:yahoo.com ptr:yahoo.net ip4:206.108.40.0/27 ip4:199.16.139.0/26 
?all"

It seems that in the case of a simple Exchange distribution list, the Yahoo 
members will fail (into their Spam folder!), some others may fail depending 
upon their service's SPF fussiness, and others may have to root around in 
their Spam folders for the content.


--
Gary Algier, WB2FWZg...@ulticom.com +1 856 787 2758
Ulticom Inc., 1020 Briggs Rd, Mt. Laurel, NJ 08054 Fax:+1 856 866 2033

Nielsen's First Law of Computer Manuals:
People don't read documentation voluntarily.
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] mailman-AttachmentMove: completely remove moved attachment?

[Mark Sapiro]

On 05/15/2014 01:48 AM, Sylvain Viart wrote:
> 
> What'd be the trouble if I completely remove attachment from the message?


None if you do it correctly.

Assuming msg is a multipart message object with 3 subparts and you want
to delete the second of the 3 parts.

parts = msg.get_payload()
# parts is a list of 3 message objects which are the sub-parts.
# delete the second.
del parts[1]
msg.set_payload(parts)

-- 
Mark Sapiro The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

[Mailman-Users] reply_goes_to_list broken in 2.1.18-1?

[Gibbs, David]

Folks:

I was previously running 2.1.17 (after having not upgraded for a VERY long 
time).  Everything is working just fine.

I saw the new DMARC modifications and decided to upgrade to 2.1.18-1.

The upgrade went fine ... but after running for a bit some of my users told me 
that when they replied to a list message it was going to the author of the 
message they are replying to instead of the list.  The Reply-to header was 
*NOT* present in the messages being sent from the list.

I have reply_goes_to_list set to "This List" for all my lists.

I down graded to 2.1.17 again and the reply-to header was once again in place.

Is this a known issue?

Thanks!

david

-- 
IBM i on Power Systems: For when you can't afford to be out of business!

I'm riding a metric century (100 km / 62 miles) in the 2014 Chicagoland Tour de 
Cure to raise money for diabetes research, education, and advocacy.  Sponsor me 
by visiting http://gmane.diabetessucks.net. Any amount is appreciated.

See where I get my donations from ... visit 
http://gmane.diabetessucks.net/mapdonations.php for an interactive map (it's a 
geeky thing).

--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Dealing with rate limiting from Roadrunner/Time Warner

[Mark Sapiro]

On 05/15/2014 06:46 AM, Conrad G T Yoder wrote:
> 
> It is a true bounce - mail is being rejected.  The error message is phrased 
> as a "temporary failure," but the message is bounced at the SMTP transaction. 
>  “At some point,” they stop bouncing.  RR won’t say when that happens.
> 
> 
> : delivery temporarily suspended: host
>cdptpa-pub-iedge-vip.email.rr.com[107.14.166.70] refused to talk to me: 421
>4.7.1 - Connection refused - <66.33.216.56> -  Too many concurrent
>connections ( <2> ) from source IP


This is a 4xx status, so it is a temp failure, and Mailman should be
retrying these.

It looks like what is going on is the outgoing MTA has received multiple
messages from Mailman for RR recipients, and is trying to send them in
parallel.

The bottom line is that these messages should be ultimately delivered.

Note that if my analysis is correct, it would appear that Mailman is
already sending 1 message per recipient to the outgoing MTA because  of
personalization or VERP enabled or SMTP_MAX_RCPTS = 1, and this is a
case where a larger SMTP_MAX_RCPTS and no VERP or personalization might
help.

Unfortunately, the only one of these things that *might* be available to
a list owner is personalization.

-- 
Mark Sapiro The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Dealing with rate limiting from Roadrunner/Time Warner

[Conrad G T Yoder]

On May 15, 2014, at 12:21 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull  wrote:

> Conrad G T Yoder writes:
> 
>> Has anyone had to deal with bounces due to rate limiting from
>> Roadrunner/Time Warner?
> 
> Are these true bounces (ie, permanent delivery failures) or just the
> temporary failures due to rate limiting, causing delays of many hours
> or days in delivery?

It is a true bounce - mail is being rejected.  The error message is phrased as 
a "temporary failure," but the message is bounced at the SMTP transaction.  “At 
some point,” they stop bouncing.  RR won’t say when that happens.


: delivery temporarily suspended: host
   cdptpa-pub-iedge-vip.email.rr.com[107.14.166.70] refused to talk to me: 421
   4.7.1 - Connection refused - <66.33.216.56> -  Too many concurrent
   connections ( <2> ) from source IP


>> http://postmaster.rr.com/spam#ratelimit
>> 
>> If so, what did you do to resolve the problem?  (That is, if things
>> “got resolved.”)
> 
> Haven't had a problem (RR is on the list of "if you don't like losing
> mail, don't do that" mailboxes for my lists).
> 
>> My hosting provider, DreamHost, continues to assert this is my
>> problem and not theirs.
> 
> This may be partly true, if you are falling afoul of the "too many
> recipients per message" limit.  In that case, if the option is
> available, then you should set personalization on for lists will more
> than a very few RR subscribers.  If not, see "full of" below.

I will probably turn that on soon - it is available to me.


> Does NightmareHost offer you any advice?  Or are they just saying "if
> you don't like our service, find another one?"  I think "find another
> one" is a great idea, personally.

On this instance, they haven’t been very helpful.  For the most part, though, 
they have been decent.  The largest of my lists that I admin has over 7600 
subscribers, with about 15 emails going out daily - that’s about 115K total 
emails a day, and for the price I am paying DH, I haven’t found anywhere near a 
better deal.  So I accept these (occasional) issues along with the deal I’m 
getting.

-Conrad

--
See something, Say something.

--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Get newer version of Mailman for Debian 6?

[Robert Heller]

At Thu, 15 May 2014 16:32:30 +0900 "Stephen J. Turnbull"  
wrote:

> 
> Sascha Rissel writes:
>  > Hello there,
>  > 
>  > I am running a vServer on Debian6.
>  > Via "apt-get install mailman" I installed and set up Mailman 2.1.13, which
>  > is running fine with 5 mailing lists on my server.
>  > 
>  > Motivated by all those discussions about Yahoo's DMARC on this list, I
>  > wondered whether I can upgrade my Mailman installation to a newer version.
>  > 
>  > I tried "apt-get update" and "apt-get upgrade" but I did not receive a
>  > newer version of Mailman.
> 
> I think it's probably easier to use aptitude (or some other UI) rather
> than apt-get.
> 
> A search at Debian (https://www.debian.org/distrib/packages#search_packages)
> shows that the current stable version of Debian (wheezy, aka Debian 7)
> includes Mailman 2.1.15, which is too old to have any DMARC mitigation
> features.  The current unstable version includes 2.1.16, which has
> some early attempts at mitigating DMARC, but apparently 2.1.17 and
> 2.1.18 are not packaged at all.


Mailman 2.1.16 is cabable of mitigating DMARC, at least well enough for most
list users, in that the from_is_list / reply to munging available in 2.1.16
does get the messages through to one's list users, even those with Yahoo, Aol,
and Hotmail addresses.  It is not pretty, but it generally works well enough.

> 
>  > Unfortunately I don't consider myself as good enough in Linux
>  > usage,
> 
> In that case I think your best bet is to upgrade Debian to "stable"
> (rather than a specific version of Debian).  Then when they release a
> new stable version you will be automatically upgraded.  I personally
> run "testing" (and have used "unstable" in the past), but it's been
> many years since I bothered to fiddle with these settings.  You should
> ask on Debian channels how to arrange to get the most recent Mailman
> as soon as a package is released.
> 
> See also https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/releasenotes for
> information on upgrading for your hardware.
> 
> --
> Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
> Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
> Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
> Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
> Unsubscribe: 
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/heller%40deepsoft.com
> 
>   
> 

-- 
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / hel...@deepsoft.com
Deepwoods Software-- http://www.deepsoft.com/
()  ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   -- against proprietary attachments



--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Get newer version of Mailman for Debian 6?

[Robert Heller]

At Wed, 14 May 2014 21:40:12 +0200 Sascha Rissel  wrote:

> 
> Hello there,
> 
> I am running a vServer on Debian6.
> Via "apt-get install mailman" I installed and set up Mailman 2.1.13, which
> is running fine with 5 mailing lists on my server.
> 
> Motivated by all those discussions about Yahoo's DMARC on this list, I
> wondered whether I can upgrade my Mailman installation to a newer version.
> 
> I tried "apt-get update" and "apt-get upgrade" but I did not receive a
> newer version of Mailman.
> 
> Unfortunately I don't consider myself as good enough in Linux usage, to be
> able to build Mailman binaries from scratch on my own. Indeed I tried, but
> already upon executing "configure" (Step 3 in Mailman's installation
> guide)
> I got a python warning
> > Distutils is not available or is incomplete
> which seems to tell me I should install another Python environment.
> 
> So I came to the point when I decided that compiling Mailman on my own is
> too complicated for me, because in the end I definitely want a bug-free
> installation of Mailman.
> 
> Is there maybe an easier way to get a more recent version of Mailman for my
> server?

I don't know how it is for Debian (I use CentOS 5, based on RHEL 5). What *I*
did was get the source RPM for Mailman 2.1.16 for Fedora 21 and using the
source RPM for CentOS 5 (2.1.9) as a guide, modified the Fedora 21 source RPM
to create a Mailman 2.1.16 binary RPM for CentOS 5. My guess is you probably
need to download the source Debian package file(s) for the whatever the
bleeding edge Debian release (Debian testing?) and the corresponding package
for Debian 6 and then compare the two. The 'magic' is all in the
mailman_2.1..debian.tar.tz files. There is actually some fairly good
documentation on how the Debian package building process works -- do a search
on 'how to build Debian package files' (or something like that). Up through
Mailman 2.1.16 or Mailman 2.1.17, there aren't any depenency issues (in terms
of how new a version of system libraries, compilers, or Python) that are
needed to build Mailman, so these fairly 'new' versions of Mailman will build
on an otherwise 'old' distribution (like CentOS 5 or Debian 6), once you have
the build environment up-to-speed -- you will probably need to install some
stock -dev packages, etc. Mailman 2.1.18 *might* want a newer version
of Python that is normally found on these systems, which might make things
'interesting'. 

It is also possible someone out there has already build a set of .deb files of 
Mailman 2.1.16 or Mailman 2.1.17 that will install on Debian 6.

> 
> In advance, thanks for your help!
> Sascha.
> --
> Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
> Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
> Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
> Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
> Unsubscribe: 
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/heller%40deepsoft.com
> 
> 

-- 
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / hel...@deepsoft.com
Deepwoods Software-- http://www.deepsoft.com/
()  ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   -- against proprietary attachments



  
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Re: [Mailman-Users] Executive summary of DMARC issues

[Larry Finch]

On May 14, 2014, at 11:47 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull  wrote:

> Peter Shute writes:
> 
>> When MS365 forwards the mails sent to the distribution list, should
>> that make the DMARC authentication fail? I thought that only
>> happened if you made changes like adding a prefix to the subject
>> line like Mailman does.
> 
> If it forwards verbatim *and* the sending domain signs the mail with
> DKIM (the common case), DMARC validation will succeed.  Without DKIM,
> DMARC validation is guaranteed to fail.  However, even in the sender
> uses DKIM, *any* change *whatsoever* to the body will cause validation
> to fail, and there are several changes to the header that could cause
> it to fail.  Furthermore, which parts of the header are protected by
> the DKIM signature are determined by the sender, not by DMARC AFAIK.
> 
> If distribution lists are pure forwards, MS365 will be OK.  But I find
> it hard to believe that that level of functionality is popular with
> users -- there's a reason why all popular MLMs implement subject
> prefixes, body headers and body footers, and it isn't "because it's
> the Microsoft way".
> 
> 

Especially as legally mailing lists are required to add unsubscribe 
instructions in the footer.

best regards,
Larry

--
Larry Finch
finc...@portadmiral.org



--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

[Mailman-Users] mailman-AttachmentMove: completely remove moved attachment?

[Sylvain Viart]

Hi,

What'd be the trouble if I completely remove attachment from the message?

First I've copied the behavior of the Handler Scrubber.py  and 
ThunderBird filelink module.

It wipes the attachment but sill send a fake one. Which looks like:

--020101070601020108020001
X-Mozilla-Cloud-Part: cloudFile; url=http://remotelocation/remotefile; 
name=original_name.pdf
Content-Type: application/octet-stream
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


Regards,
Sylvain
--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

[Mailman-Users] Get newer version of Mailman for Debian 6?

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Sascha Rissel writes:
 > Hello there,
 > 
 > I am running a vServer on Debian6.
 > Via "apt-get install mailman" I installed and set up Mailman 2.1.13, which
 > is running fine with 5 mailing lists on my server.
 > 
 > Motivated by all those discussions about Yahoo's DMARC on this list, I
 > wondered whether I can upgrade my Mailman installation to a newer version.
 > 
 > I tried "apt-get update" and "apt-get upgrade" but I did not receive a
 > newer version of Mailman.

I think it's probably easier to use aptitude (or some other UI) rather
than apt-get.

A search at Debian (https://www.debian.org/distrib/packages#search_packages)
shows that the current stable version of Debian (wheezy, aka Debian 7)
includes Mailman 2.1.15, which is too old to have any DMARC mitigation
features.  The current unstable version includes 2.1.16, which has
some early attempts at mitigating DMARC, but apparently 2.1.17 and
2.1.18 are not packaged at all.

 > Unfortunately I don't consider myself as good enough in Linux
 > usage,

In that case I think your best bet is to upgrade Debian to "stable"
(rather than a specific version of Debian).  Then when they release a
new stable version you will be automatically upgraded.  I personally
run "testing" (and have used "unstable" in the past), but it's been
many years since I bothered to fiddle with these settings.  You should
ask on Debian channels how to arrange to get the most recent Mailman
as soon as a package is released.

See also https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/releasenotes for
information on upgrading for your hardware.

--
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org