On 05/16/2014 04:47 PM, Bill Horne wrote:
On 5/16/2014 2:10 PM, Derek Atkins wrote:
Matthew Gillenm...@mattgillen.net writes:
On 05/16/2014 12:52 PM, Bill Horne wrote:
My first question is whether mailman allows the BLU to selectively
munge
headers based on the recipient's preferences: if
On 05/16/2014 01:35 PM, Richard Pieri wrote:
The [Discuss] tags are unnecessary. Every message that comes through
the list has readily identifiable Sender (RFC 2822) and List-ID (RFC
2919) field contents.
I beg to differ. While I use LIST-ID, many users have rules based on the
subject line.
From: discuss-bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org [mailto:discuss-
bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org] On Behalf Of Bill Horne
I just posted from a Yahoo account, but I don't think that's the issue:
the problem, if I understand it, is that other subscribers to this list
who have gmail,
From: discuss-bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org [mailto:discuss-
bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org] On Behalf Of Bill Horne
My first question is whether mailman allows the BLU to selectively munge
headers based on the recipient's preferences:
The answer to that question is in the mailman
From: discuss-bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org [mailto:discuss-
bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org] On Behalf Of Matthew Gillen
which
might break threading on mail clients that rely on same-subject (do any
really do that anymore?)
All the mail clients that I know of, attempt to
From: discuss-bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org [mailto:discuss-
bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org] On Behalf Of Bill Horne
It was added in 2.1.16, and fixed in 2.1.18.
Since the BLU is currently using 2.1.12, I think an obvious solution is
available ...
How many
Jerry Feldman wrote:
I beg to differ. While I use LIST-ID, many users have rules based on the
subject line.
Is there some grand force out there that prevents subscribers from
changing their filter rules to use proper header fields?
While, on this list, if I turned this off it probably would
On 05/17/2014 08:52 AM, Edward Ned Harvey (blu) wrote:
From: discuss-bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org [mailto:discuss-
bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org] On Behalf Of Bill Horne
It was added in 2.1.16, and fixed in 2.1.18.
Since the BLU is currently using 2.1.12, I think an obvious solution
On 05/17/2014 09:03 AM, Richard Pieri wrote:
Jerry Feldman wrote:
I beg to differ. While I use LIST-ID, many users have rules based on the
subject line.
Is there some grand force out there that prevents subscribers from
changing their filter rules to use proper header fields?
While, on
Jerry Feldman wrote:
Yes it is. We host thousands of members on our listservs, and many of
them use email clients that do not have the capability of selecting on
list-id.
Like I said, this is not your problem. Nor is it your responsibility to
break mail handling standards to cater to broken
On 05/16/2014 11:53 AM, Richard Pieri wrote:
Not a misconfiguration per se. exim4's TLS key exchange wants at least
1024 bits of prime number by default but Yahoo is using fewer bits than
that. You can change this in your local exim4 config with the
TLS_DH_MIN_BITS setting (a value of 512
On 5/17/2014 8:52 AM, Edward Ned Harvey (blu) wrote:
From: discuss-bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org [mailto:discuss-
bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org] On Behalf Of Bill Horne
It was added in 2.1.16, and fixed in 2.1.18.
Since the BLU is currently using 2.1.12, I think an obvious solution is
Edward Ned Harvey (blu) wrote:
Apparently yahoo recently set their DMARC policy to reject...
It seems, the solution is to enable from_is_list so the message
will actually send From: Edward Ned Harvey via The List and
Reply-To: Edward Ned Harvey myem...@nedharvey.com
Richard Pieri wrote:
From: discuss-bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org [mailto:discuss-
bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org] On Behalf Of Bill Horne
Have you looked into who's behind creating DMARC? AOL, Google,
Microsoft, Yahoo, Facebook, Comcast, and others.
If you're inferring that the advertiser-supported
Tom Metro wrote:
So the gist of the problem is that DMARC is asserting that mail from a
particular sender should be originating from certain servers, and unlike
SPF (also part of DMARC, but not the part causing problems), this looks
not at the envelope sender address, but the RFC822 message
15 matches
Mail list logo
