[mailop] Extreme multiple posting (was Re: OVH Bulk Mailer? Anyone know this one?)
you know, Mr Allard, it appears that you sent this message to the list at least 5 times... On Wed, 5 Aug 2020 15:54:57 +0200 Renaud Allard via mailop wrote: > > > On 8/5/20 2:47 PM, Otto J. Makela via mailop wrote: > > On 21/05/2019 12.37, Otto J. Makela via mailop wrote: > >> Is there any point in receiving any email from any OVH space, > >> since discussions on this list would seem to indicate they have > >> no functioning abuse enforcement? > >> > >> Numerous netblocks registered to them [...] > >> seem to be permanent spammer havens. > > > > Has the situation improved at all in the last year, > > or shall I keep denying access for OVH large blocks? > > > > It is about the same as blocking Hetzner or AWS or any VPS provider. You > will definitely stop some spam, and lose some ham altogether. There are > definitely real, legitimate servers in OVH space. But, your servers, > your rules. > -- Large Hadron Collider ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
[mailop] [OFFTOPIC] Working offline mode (was Re: How long to retry?)
Please change your font to a monospaced font to view this message optimally. I'll admit, I think it took me a bit to comprehend offline mode, back when I was like 6 or 7. I feel like having a box like this one I've just drawn you pop up every time you enqueue a message to send while under offline conditions would minimise user confusion. > .-. > | [-] You are currently working offline [X] | > |-| > | (!) Messages composed now will not be sent unless and | > | until you deactivate work offline mode. If you want | > | to attempt to deliver the message now, select "Go online". | > | If you wish to save the message to your local outbox, and | > | have it send next time you enable networking, select | > | Remain offline." To save as a local draft instead of in| > | local outbox, select "Draft." | > | | > | If you don't know what this is, you probably accidentally | > | enabled work offline mode, and you should select "Go | > | online". You should also select "Go online" if you have| > | a functional internet connection at the moment.| > | | > | [Go online] [Remain offline] [Draft] [Cancel] | > '-' As far as I know, there is no email client that does this. I think that that is contributing to the climate of confusion around work offline mode which most people don't even know exists until they stop receiving emails. On Tue, 4 Feb 2020 12:40:58 +0100 Thomas Walter via mailop wrote: > > > On 04.02.20 11:31, Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop wrote: > > However, for big web-based email providers like Google, who tend to have > > less educated users ;), it would be a good idea what Brandon already > > mentioned here - some way of signalling in the GUI that a particular message > > has not yet been sent, but is waiting in the queue. > > People don't understand why there are unsent messages in their current > outbox if they accidentally switched their MUA to offline mode. > > They won't understand this either. > > Regards, > Thomas Walter > > -- > Thomas Walter > Datenverarbeitungszentrale > > FH Münster > - University of Applied Sciences - > Corrensstr. 25, Raum B 112 > 48149 Münster > > Tel: +49 251 83 64 908 > Fax: +49 251 83 64 910 > www.fh-muenster.de/dvz/ > > ___ > mailop mailing list > mailop@mailop.org > https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop -- Large Hadron Collider ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
Re: [mailop] How long to retry?
The 1st NDR (we will be trying for the next N days) can come in around half an
hour of no delivery. Electronic mail has a delay even when it's working
properly. That's why it's not called instant messaging. I generally expect
around a 5 to 10 minute delay on messages. I have the naïve user mindset of
checking immediately, because I know the delays are usually shorter than I
expect, but I don't get antsy about deliverability until a big tranche of an
hour has passed.
Having 7 day delivery is better than not having any delivery at all, but you do
need to balance that against disk space concerns.
On Mon, 03 Feb 2020 14:43:35 -0800
"Luis E. Muñoz via mailop" wrote:
>
>
> On 3 Feb 2020, at 14:20, Michael Orlitzky via mailop wrote:
>
> > You have problems with 100% of messages 0.0001% of the time -- it's
> > not
> > a steady 99. success rate, even though that's what the numbers
> > look
> > like if your window is five-years long.
>
> Since recently – heh, let's call it 5-6 years – I've observed more
> and more that senders are unable to connect the first NDR ("your mail is
> stuck, we're still trying") with their original message. There's some
> cognitive dissonance at play here. If the bounce is not instantaneous,
> that NDR is a waste of resources for them. More or less the same happens
> with the final NDR ("sorry, I give up"), where they seem to be unable to
> grasp that the message was not delivered.
>
> Setting the first NDR too soon tend to cause confusion – and often, a
> resent of the same message – which does not improve the situation for
> that specific communication.
>
> This issue is, IMO, testament that the email landscape today is far more
> resilient than 30 years ago. But we still need to accommodate the
> occasional flooded rack. User expectations are very heavily driven by
> what happens with 99.% of their email. Can't say I blame them.
>
> Personally, I've seen more bounces in the last 3 months due to receivers
> wanting to do TLSv1.0 than the rest of possible causes, all together.
> The NDR has helped notice this and make special arrangements. But still,
> the senders were not entirely aware of what happened to their email
> during the few hours they remained in our outbound queues.
>
> Best regards
>
> -lem
>
> ___
> mailop mailing list
> mailop@mailop.org
> https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
--
Large Hadron Collider
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
Re: [mailop] Can someone write me a prescription for a sane MTA? I'm allergic to Postfix.
I'm actually 19 so I largely use it for nostalgia's sake. Yes. I'm 19 and I'm a private email operator. And I've used UUCP. Part of it is to get around SMTP blocks, part of it is to, as I said, entertain nostalgia. I don't really know. I guess I am fond of bangpaths. On 19-12-07 20 h 34, Philip Paeps via mailop wrote: On 2019-12-06 09:17:56 (-0800), John Levine via mailop wrote: In article <22015da3-552b-2320-c86e-d16d1d13b...@mgm51.com> you write: Perhaps is the need for UUCP support had been mentioned in the email's subject and not a couple emails later... Twenty years ago all the MTAs supported uucp, but these days I would be surprised if any remaining uucp code was other than cruft that nobody had bothered to delete. If you really want uucp support, you're going to have to do some gateway programming. uucp was a a thing of wonder when the earth was young and Telebit modems were state of the art, but today? really? I'd be interested in why he's still using uucp. I wouldn't be surprised if this is in the category of "it's been working for decades, why would I change it now?!". I'd also be interested in the full story though. I always enjoy tales from the crypts. :-) Philip ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
Re: [mailop] Can someone write me a prescription for a sane MTA? I'm allergic to Postfix.
Well I am using it over the internet. And it's strictly for nostalgia's sake, as well as future expansion to utilitarian uses where email has to be sent from a host on a dynamic IP. On 19-12-06 10 h 08, Luis E. Muñoz via mailop wrote: On 6 Dec 2019, at 9:17, John Levine via mailop wrote: I'd be interested in why he's still using uucp. +1 ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
Re: [mailop] Can someone write me a prescription for a sane MTA? I'm allergic to Postfix.
Mike from LinuxMagic emailed me out of band suggesting his company's own solution, which I found somewhat inappropriate. Trouble is, I actually forgot to enumerate my installation size and peculiar requirements. My installation size is personal and friends, across multiple sites. Mailboxes are not going to be redundant across sites - every site has separate userbases. One of my requirements is that the MTA be capable of punting emails that are destined for a UUCP host (either as defined in a forwarding file, or explicitly named with a bangpath) into Unix-to-Unix copy. Postfix, which I recently developed an allergy to, doesn't even have that (though it does have partial UUCP support, in that it can punt emails to a Unix-to-Unix copy), but I settled because it was easy to configure on the single host I have been using an MTA on to date. I will not need assistance in setup if documentation is clear and concise. On 19-12-05 15 h 53, Brielle via mailop wrote: I use Exim, and have been for a lng time. The multi-file config package in Debian is quite nice and makes it easy to configure and customize. On 12/5/2019 4:36 PM, Large Hadron Collider via mailop wrote: The subject says it all. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
Re: [mailop] Can someone write me a prescription for a sane MTA? I'm allergic to Postfix.
Is sendmail going to be able to handle peculiar mixed Internet/Unix-to-Unix-Copy installations? Exim is apparently not able to do this satisfactorily, and Postfix (which I have been using; the antihistamines ARE working (-; ) isn't so good with bangpaths (despite being very compatible with mixed installations) mostly owing to a total lack (in my installation) of an rmail program (so I had to jank sendmail into place as the rmail program). On 19-12-05 16 h 14, Suresh Ramasubramanian via mailop wrote: I can recommend sendmail. Or Lotus Domino. Either will work as an mta but more importantly they’ll cure you of your postfix allergy asap. That said I use Exim too, try it by all means - it is quite nice plus you don’t need to switch to Debian for it or use Debians rather idiosyncratic multifile config either --srs *From:* mailop on behalf of Brielle via mailop *Sent:* Friday, December 6, 2019 5:30 AM *To:* mailop@mailop.org *Subject:* Re: [mailop] Can someone write me a prescription for a sane MTA? I'm allergic to Postfix. I use Exim, and have been for a lng time. The multi-file config package in Debian is quite nice and makes it easy to configure and customize. On 12/5/2019 4:36 PM, Large Hadron Collider via mailop wrote: > The subject says it all. > > > ___ > mailop mailing list > mailop@mailop.org > https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop -- Brielle Bruns The Summit Open Source Development Group http://www.sosdg.org / http://www.ahbl.org ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
[mailop] Can someone write me a prescription for a sane MTA? I'm allergic to Postfix.
The subject says it all. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
