[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Barry A. Warsaw) writes:
When USE_ENVELOPE_SENDER was the default, it was next to useless
because it rarely matched the sender's membership address. So
that's why it was disabled.
Understandable. By the same token, there are cases where From doesn't
match, but the
JRM == Jason R Mastaler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When USE_ENVELOPE_SENDER was the default, it was next to
useless because it rarely matched the sender's membership
address. So that's why it was disabled.
JRM Understandable. By the same token, there are cases where
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Barry A. Warsaw) writes:
True. I wonder if Reply-To: ought to be added to the mix?
It wouldn't hurt. FWIW, TMDA checks Reply-To: in addition to From:
and the envelope sender.
Note that all are easily spoofable, so that argument doesn't bother
me much.
Exactly. Which
JRM == Jason R Mastaler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
JRM Well, at least we are fixing this here.
evil laugh=manical
Mailman shall rule THE WORLD!
/evil
If so, the order ought to go (I think)
1. From: 2. From_ 3. Reply-To: 4. Sender:
JRM Alrighty.
Cool, thanks.
-Barry
DM == Dan Mick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
DM I could be high, but it looks like the sequence in Bouncer.py
DM is:
| 1) are we a member? No, return
| 2) do we have previous bounces? No, register it and quit
| 3) is the member disabled? yes, quit
| 4) is the bounce
Please visit the archive of the following listserve. Could you let us know
how we can correct the messages not to appear with so many codes in the
thread discussions and responses and approvals the moderators need to
perform.
http://www.cambridge.edu/eforum/
Example:
This is a multi-part
[Barry, question for you further down]
On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 03:22:43PM -0800, Darrell Fuhriman wrote:
Right now, it's essentially impossible to have more than one
machine doing Mailman processing. (Yes, there are ways to hack
around it, but they get ugly quickly.)
I have a mail server
At 01:09 AM 11/01/02 -0500, you wrote:
Of course, I'm a musician[1] not an artist, so I need your help.
I'm a musician too (well, more so than artist) but at 16x16 I can at least
blame the medium. :) Here's a first attempt.
http://terri.zone12.com/mm.gif
BTW, hi everyone. I'm new. I
MM == Marc MERLIN [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
MM You _can_ export ~mailman over NFS. The problem was that with
MM linux 2.2 back then, under very high load and lock contention
MM (I sent 1000 messages to the same list on the two different
MM mail servers to force them to fight
In URL:news:local.mailman-d on Mon 28 Jan, Barry A. Warsaw wrote:
[snip]
Possibly you need the python-devel rpms too? I think I hit a similar
issue with StandaloneZODB, which I just released last Friday. Double
check that and if that's not it, we can go from there.
[blushes]
1) are we a member? No, return
2) do we have previous bounces? No, register it skip to step 7
3) is the member disabled? yes, quit
4) is the bounce info from today? yes, don't increment, skip to step 7
5) is the info stale? yes, reset it and skip to step 7
6) increment score for
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 12:20:35AM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jay R. Ashworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't see that there *is* any theoretical way to *keep* loads down
with VERP, by it's very nature.
If one was willing to extend SMTP again,
CM == Colin Mackinlay [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
CM [blushes]
CM email-0.96 straight in!
Yay!
CM Now that just leaves me withthe main problem I've been trying
CM to fix - web based approval of list subscription. I asked this
CM question originally on Mailman-Users
Also, don't forget that you need to ignore days that go by without posts. You
need to count posting days.
Bob
1) are we a member? No, return
2) do we have previous bounces? No, register it skip to step 7
3) is the member disabled? yes, quit
4) is the bounce info from today? yes,
14 matches
Mail list logo
