Re: [Mailman-Users] DMARC and gmail

[Richard Damon]

On 7/19/17 9:13 AM, Kevin Nowaczyk via Mailman-Users wrote:

I've recently been hearing that some subscribers to a club mailing list who use gmail are having 
all messages pushed to their spam folder. One user said it's only an issue when the sender is a 
gmail user as well. I'm running mailman 2.1.23 and had dmarc_moderation_action set to the default 
value..which I think was Accept. I recently changed it to "Munge From". The 
dmarc_quarantine_moderation_action is set to yes, and dmarc_none_moderation_action is No. When 
using the old settings gmail listed messgaes as: SPF PASS, DKIM "Neutral with domain 
null", and DMARC FAIL, but when a non-gmail user sent a message the DMARC was not listed.
After changing to "Munge From" it still has a DMARC fail. What are the 
differences that I should be seeing after changing the dmarc_moderation_action? Here is 
an authentication header of a message from a gmail user to a gmail user.
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com;
dkim=neutral (body hash did not verify) header.i=@gmail.com 
header.b=dAmiQOEo;
spf=pass (google.com: domain of bockbrew-boun...@lists.bockbrew.com 
designates 65.181.121.110 as permitted sender) 
smtp.mailfrom=bockbrew-boun...@lists.bockbrew.com;
dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com
Thanks for any help,Kevin Nowaczyk
My experience with GMail is that a message with a broken DKIM signature 
(because of list modification of the message) will cause the message to 
be put into the spam folder unless you have your list resign the message 
or establish a SPF setting for the domain.


One warning, if you do establish SPF for your domain, then anyone who 
sets up a 'forwarding' for your list emails to gmail (or someone who 
checks SPF records) will start to bounce.


--
Richard Damon

--
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] DMARC and gmail

[Mark Sapiro]

On 07/19/2017 06:13 AM, Kevin Nowaczyk via Mailman-Users wrote:
> ... dmarc_none_moderation_action is No. ...
> After changing to "Munge From" it still has a DMARC fail. What are the 
> differences that I should be seeing after changing the 
> dmarc_moderation_action? Here is an authentication header of a message from a 
> gmail user to a gmail user.

gmail.com publishes DMARC p=none

_dmarc.gmail.com.   399 IN  TXT "v=DMARC1; p=none;
rua=mailto:mailauth-repo...@google.com";

Thus, you will see no differences in mail From: gmail.com unless you
also set dmarc_none_moderation_action to Yes. (Note that this setting is
not really recommended and is not available in Mailman 3's DMARC
mitigations.)

The underlying issue may be (speculating here) that Gmail doesn't like
mail From: gmail.com with broken gmail.com DKIM signatures. If so, this
is contrary to the recommendation of the DKIM standard RFC 6376. Section
6.3 of that RFC says in part:

   If the email cannot be verified, then it SHOULD be treated the same
   as all unverified email, regardless of whether or not it looks like
   it was signed.


-- 
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] DMARC and gmail

[Christian F Buser via Mailman-Users]

Hi Kevin

GMAIL is a problem itself. On another mailing list (which is not a
Mailman list and I am not a moderator or something like that), messages
seem even to be held back by GMAIL and not delivered at all to the
subscribers.

I am not sure whether a GMAIL user can "educate" the mail server to not
consider certain messages as spam/junk by unmarking them and moving them
into the normal inbox.

Christian


> Kevin Nowaczyk via Mailman-Users 
> 19. Juli 2017 um 15:13
> I've recently been hearing that some subscribers to a club mailing
> list who use gmail are having all messages pushed to their spam
> folder. One user said it's only an issue when the sender is a gmail
> user as well. I'm running mailman 2.1.23 and had
> dmarc_moderation_action set to the default value..which I think was
> Accept. I recently changed it to "Munge From". The
> dmarc_quarantine_moderation_action is set to yes, and
> dmarc_none_moderation_action is No. When using the old settings gmail
> listed messgaes as: SPF PASS, DKIM "Neutral with domain null", and
> DMARC FAIL, but when a non-gmail user sent a message the DMARC was not
> listed.
> After changing to "Munge From" it still has a DMARC fail. What are the
> differences that I should be seeing after changing the
> dmarc_moderation_action? Here is an authentication header of a message
> from a gmail user to a gmail user.
> ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com;
> dkim=neutral (body hash did not verify) header.i=@gmail.com
> header.b=dAmiQOEo;
> spf=pass (google.com: domain of bockbrew-boun...@lists.bockbrew.com
> designates 65.181.121.110 as permitted sender)
> smtp.mailfrom=bockbrew-boun...@lists.bockbrew.com;
> dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com
> Thanks for any help,Kevin Nowaczyk
>
> --
> 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/luscheina%40yahoo.de

-- 
Christian F. Buser, Hohle Gasse 6, CH-5507 Mellingen (Switzerland)  
Hilfe für Strassenkinder in Ghana: http://www.chance-for-children.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] DMARC and gmail

[Kevin Nowaczyk via Mailman-Users]

I've recently been hearing that some subscribers to a club mailing list who use 
gmail are having all messages pushed to their spam folder. One user said it's 
only an issue when the sender is a gmail user as well. I'm running mailman 
2.1.23 and had dmarc_moderation_action set to the default value..which I think 
was Accept. I recently changed it to "Munge From". The 
dmarc_quarantine_moderation_action is set to yes, and 
dmarc_none_moderation_action is No. When using the old settings gmail listed 
messgaes as: SPF PASS, DKIM "Neutral with domain null", and DMARC FAIL, but 
when a non-gmail user sent a message the DMARC was not listed.
After changing to "Munge From" it still has a DMARC fail. What are the 
differences that I should be seeing after changing the dmarc_moderation_action? 
Here is an authentication header of a message from a gmail user to a gmail user.
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com;
   dkim=neutral (body hash did not verify) header.i=@gmail.com 
header.b=dAmiQOEo;
   spf=pass (google.com: domain of bockbrew-boun...@lists.bockbrew.com 
designates 65.181.121.110 as permitted sender) 
smtp.mailfrom=bockbrew-boun...@lists.bockbrew.com;
   dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com
Thanks for any help,Kevin Nowaczyk

--
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] DMARC and Gmail

[Mark Sapiro]

On 04/16/2014 12:49 PM, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> 
> Simple pass-through forwarding/redirection of email is one of the
> situations in which SPF fails.  Does this in any way impact DMARC?


Not if the message is properly DKIM signed by the From: domain. In this
case DKIM passes and the domains align so the fact that SPF fails for
the original envelope sender doesn't matter.

-- 
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] DMARC and Gmail

[Barry Warsaw]

On Apr 17, 2014, at 04:34 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:

>Sure, but that's the tradeoff that DMARC explicitly makes.  DMARC
>thinks that rejecting spam and phishing is sometimes more important
>than delivering legitimate mail, and that the provider of a mailbox is
>the appropriate entity to make that decision.

Of course, it really doesn't help with phishing because with a slight tweak of
the domain (or even a similar enough non-ascii domain), you can still put
phishing links in the body and I'll bet you'll still fool most people who
would be tricked anyway.

>It's not limited to mailing lists, either.  Anybody who has a
>forwarding mailbox is at some risk (in a personal .forward this is a
>simple pass-through preserving the DKIM signature so it should be OK,

Yeah that sucks too.  I sure hope none of the FLOSS projects I work on never
publish a DMARC reject.

Sigh.
-Barry
--
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] DMARC and Gmail

[Lindsay Haisley]

On Thu, 2014-04-17 at 04:34 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> It's not limited to mailing lists, either.  Anybody who has a
> forwarding mailbox is at some risk (in a personal .forward this is a
> simple pass-through preserving the DKIM signature so it should be OK,
> but I've seen commercial forwarders who add junk in the footer)

Simple pass-through forwarding/redirection of email is one of the
situations in which SPF fails.  Does this in any way impact DMARC?

-- 
Lindsay Haisley   | "We have met the enemy and he is us."
FMP Computer Services |
512-259-1190  |  -- Pogo
http://www.fmp.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] DMARC and Gmail

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Alain Williams writes:

 > They should have allowed/defined a new 2xy code that could be
 > returned, eg 253 which means ''Mail accepted but will be
 > discarded''.

That's problematic.  It would require an extension negotiated via EHLO
at least, and maybe a new SMTP RFC, since there's no registry for
extensions to the SMTP reply codes.  It might not be harmful, since
most modern MTAs are 2821-conforming, and so must interpret 253 as a
"2yz success" == 250, even if they don't understand 253 specifically.
I note that RFC 821, the current standard, does *not* have this
requirement, though.  Still, it could work, I guess, since DMARC
policies are outside-of-RFC agreements anyway.

 > However: it still means that some people on mail lists occasionally
 > don't get stuff - this will cause confusion at best or could be
 > dangerous (if the mail list has a critical function).

Sure, but that's the tradeoff that DMARC explicitly makes.  DMARC
thinks that rejecting spam and phishing is sometimes more important
than delivering legitimate mail, and that the provider of a mailbox is
the appropriate entity to make that decision.

It's not limited to mailing lists, either.  Anybody who has a
forwarding mailbox is at some risk (in a personal .forward this is a
simple pass-through preserving the DKIM signature so it should be OK,
but I've seen commercial forwarders who add junk in the footer), and
it breaks the common patterns where a website allows you to request a
mail to a friend or an email service provider allows you to use
different From addresses (all of my mail from my @xemacs.org address
is sent from a different domain, and of the large webmail providers at
least Gmail provides this feature, and I use it occasionally).
--
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] DMARC and Gmail

[Jim Popovitch]

On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 1:35 PM, Joseph Brennan  wrote:
>
> [DMARC's words]
>
>>o  A "silent discard", wherein the SMTP server returns a 2xy reply
>>   code implying to the client that delivery (or, at least, relay)
>>   was successfully completed, but then simply discarding the
>>   message with no further action.
>
>
> Naturally the people who can't read RFC5322 and understand that the From
> header line represents the writer of the message also can't read RFC5321 and
> grasp that a 2xy code signifies a responsibility that is well defined (sec
> 4.2.5).
>
> They're just making stuff up.  And companies that fall for it betray their
> cluelessness.
>
> Joseph Brennan
> Columbia University Information Technology
>
> (N.B. They were so proud of using "wherein" that they got lost later in the
> sentence-- s/b "discards" not "discarding".)
>

+10  ^^ This is by far the best description of the situation.

-Jim P.
--
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] DMARC and Gmail

[Joseph Brennan]

[DMARC's words]

   o  A "silent discard", wherein the SMTP server returns a 2xy reply
  code implying to the client that delivery (or, at least, relay)
  was successfully completed, but then simply discarding the
  message with no further action.


Naturally the people who can't read RFC5322 and understand that the From 
header line represents the writer of the message also can't read RFC5321 
and grasp that a 2xy code signifies a responsibility that is well defined 
(sec 4.2.5).


They're just making stuff up.  And companies that fall for it betray their 
cluelessness.


Joseph Brennan
Columbia University Information Technology

(N.B. They were so proud of using "wherein" that they got lost later in the 
sentence-- s/b "discards" not "discarding".)




--
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] DMARC and Gmail

[Alain Williams]

On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 01:27:23AM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:

> There are several possibilities.  One is that DMARC doesn't define the
> semantics of "reject".  (Why doesn't that surprise me?)  Here's what
> they say:
> 
>15.4.  Rejecting Messages
> 
>This proposal calls for rejection of a message during the SMTP
>session under certain circumstances.  This is typically done in one
>of two ways:
> 
>o  Full rejection, wherein the SMTP server issues a 5xy reply code
>   as an indication to the SMTP client that the transaction failed;
>   the SMTP client is then responsible for generating notification
>   that delivery failed (see Section 4.2.5 of [SMTP]).
> 
>o  A "silent discard", wherein the SMTP server returns a 2xy reply
>   code implying to the client that delivery (or, at least, relay)
>   was successfully completed, but then simply discarding the
>   message with no further action.
> 
>Each of these has a cost.  For instance, a silent discard may
>prevent "backscatter" (the annoying generation of delivery failure
>reports, which go back to the RFC5321.MailFrom address, about
>messages that were fraudulently generated), but effectively means
>the SMTP server has to be programmed to give a false result, which
>can confound external debugging efforts.

They should have allowed/defined a new 2xy code that could be returned, eg 253
which means ''Mail accepted but will be discarded''. So a simple sending MTA 
could
just look at the initial '2' and think 'job done', a more complex one could note
that the receipt wasn't quite right.

However: it still means that some people on mail lists occasionally don't get
stuff - this will cause confusion at best or could be dangerous (if the mail
list has a critical function).

-- 
Alain Williams
Linux/GNU Consultant - Mail systems, Web sites, Networking, Programmer, IT 
Lecturer.
+44 (0) 787 668 0256  http://www.phcomp.co.uk/
Parliament Hill Computers Ltd. Registration Information: 
http://www.phcomp.co.uk/contact.php
#include 
--
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] DMARC and Gmail

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Lindsay Haisley writes:

 > I've been working with the list admins of one of FMP's hosted lists and
 > they've seen over 100 addresses unsubscribed from the usual suspects -
 > yahoo.com, att.net, Comcast, etc., but no Gmail accounts and there are
 > 228 of them on the list.  Nonetheless, the PC World article [...]
 > lists Gmail as being one of the cooperating email service providers
 > honoring Yahoo's DMARC p=reject policy.

I wouldn't trust the popular press to be fully accurate.  Even one
test delivery failure would probably be counted as "honoring", and
it's not obvious that you need to specifically test mailing lists,
since DMARC doesn't explicitly allow treating different DMARC failures
differently.

 > I've been telling list admins to recommend that subscribers drop
 > their Yahoo accounts in favor of Gmail.

That remains good policy AFAICT.

 > What's the story here?

There are several possibilities.  One is that DMARC doesn't define the
semantics of "reject".  (Why doesn't that surprise me?)  Here's what
they say:

   15.4.  Rejecting Messages

   This proposal calls for rejection of a message during the SMTP
   session under certain circumstances.  This is typically done in one
   of two ways:

   o  Full rejection, wherein the SMTP server issues a 5xy reply code
  as an indication to the SMTP client that the transaction failed;
  the SMTP client is then responsible for generating notification
  that delivery failed (see Section 4.2.5 of [SMTP]).

   o  A "silent discard", wherein the SMTP server returns a 2xy reply
  code implying to the client that delivery (or, at least, relay)
  was successfully completed, but then simply discarding the
  message with no further action.

   Each of these has a cost.  For instance, a silent discard may
   prevent "backscatter" (the annoying generation of delivery failure
   reports, which go back to the RFC5321.MailFrom address, about
   messages that were fraudulently generated), but effectively means
   the SMTP server has to be programmed to give a false result, which
   can confound external debugging efforts.

A "silent discard" by Google is consistent with your observation,
since no bounce would be generated.

However, it is not consistent with Mark's experimental outcome.[1]  So
apparently, at least in their implementation of DMARC, Google takes
their "Don't Be Evil" slogan quite seriously.

It is clear to me that the "silent discard" method is the right way to
handle a DMARC p=reject policy.  Although the receiving MTA is "giving
a false result" in some sense, in fact the DMARC-using domain can
request a specific failure report which will enable the domain to
determine why non-delivery occurred despite an SMTP success.  If they
don't request such a report, too bad for their users.

Note that the "annoyance" mentioned in the 4th paragraph includes
denial of service to completely innocent third parties, ie, the
DMARC-triggered unsubscribes that have been observed.


Footnotes: 
[1]  His message arrived while I was composing this one.

--
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] DMARC and Gmail

[Mark Sapiro]

On 04/16/2014 06:58 AM, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> Has anyone seen issues with Gmail accounts and Yahoo's DMARC policy?
> I've been working with the list admins of one of FMP's hosted lists and
> they've seen over 100 addresses unsubscribed from the usual suspects -
> yahoo.com, att.net, Comcast, etc., but no Gmail accounts and there are
> 228 of them on the list.


This is consistent with what I've observed on lists.


> Nonetheless, the PC World article at
> http://www.pcworld.com/article/2141120/yahoo-email-antispoofing-policy-breaks-mailing-lists.html
> lists Gmail as being one of the cooperating email service providers
> honoring Yahoo's DMARC p=reject policy.


I've done some testing. If I send a message from my server, but not from
a list From: a yahoo.com address to a gmail address, it gets rejected with

> 550-5.7.1 Unauthenticated email from yahoo.com is not accepted due to domain's
> 550-5.7.1 DMARC policy. Please contact administrator of yahoo.com domain if
> 550-5.7.1 this was a legitimate mail. Please visit
> 550-5.7.1  http://support.google.com/mail/answer/2451690 to learn about DMARC
> 550 5.7.1 initiative. uc7si1048327pbc.131 - gsmtp

However, if I send the same message to a list which then resends it
without touching the From: to the same gmail address, gmail accepts it
and delivers it to my gmail spam folder.

Thus, it appears that gmail does honor DMARC policy in general, but has
some kind of mitigation policy to identify (heuristicly? via headers?)
mail from a list and quarantine it even if the From: domain's policy is
reject.

Note it doesn't use the RFC 2369 List- headers because it still
recognizes a message without them as from a 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

[Mailman-Users] DMARC and Gmail

[Lindsay Haisley]

Has anyone seen issues with Gmail accounts and Yahoo's DMARC policy?
I've been working with the list admins of one of FMP's hosted lists and
they've seen over 100 addresses unsubscribed from the usual suspects -
yahoo.com, att.net, Comcast, etc., but no Gmail accounts and there are
228 of them on the list.  Nonetheless, the PC World article at
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2141120/yahoo-email-antispoofing-policy-breaks-mailing-lists.html
lists Gmail as being one of the cooperating email service providers
honoring Yahoo's DMARC p=reject policy.

I've been telling list admins to recommend that subscribers drop their
Yahoo accounts in favor of Gmail.  What's the story here?

-- 
Lindsay Haisley   | "Everything works if you let it"
FMP Computer Services |
512-259-1190  |  --- The Roadie
http://www.fmp.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