post: message has no Resent-From: header
post: See default components files for examples
post: re-format message and try again
It appears that he default rcvdistcomps was not appropriately
modified to insert the Resent-From: header.
Harv
*** rcvdistcomps.orig 2012-06-12 15:15:16.0
Harv wrote:
post: message has no Resent-From: header
post: See default components files for examples
post: re-format message and try again
It appears that he default rcvdistcomps was not appropriately
modified to insert the Resent-From: header.
Thanks, I applied your patch (and also to
This message should have a random Message-ID.
The trouble is, it's not a valid Message-ID. You sent:
Message-ID: 16888-1342905949.421986@QcTLPy+DeAJLdhEN
The grammar production requires:
msg-id = [CFWS] id-left @ id-right [CFWS]
So you need to stuff an '@' in there someplace.
On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 16:25:49 -0500, David Levine said:
This message should have a random Message-ID.
Message-id: 16888-1342905949.421986@QcTLPy+DeAJLdhEN
Looks good to me - but will some busticated software that assumes everything
after the @ is syntactically (if not semantically) a hostname
On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 14:36:19 -0700, Lyndon Nerenberg said:
This message should have a random Message-ID.
The trouble is, it's not a valid Message-ID. You sent:
Message-ID: 16888-1342905949.421986@QcTLPy+DeAJLdhEN
The grammar production requires:
msg-id = [CFWS] id-left @
Odd.. My copy of the message, and the one you quoted, both apparently
had an '@' in them, between the '6' and the 'Q'? ;)
Odd. My brain and eyeballs cannot spot an '@' between a '6' and a 'Q'.
And I was pretty sure my editor search for it, umm, failed.
Doh.
--lyndon
Valdis wrote:
Looks good to me - but will some busticated software that assumes everything
after the @ is syntactically (if not semantically) a hostname get upset at
the + in there? (Personally, I don't care, all of my stuff just want a unique
string inside the , and if my stuff is busted
David Levine levin...@acm.org writes:
Non-qualified hostnames do get used, even to this list. I
looked at a small collection of spam and saw hardly any
random hostname parts, but the sample is biased (it got
through some filters) and very small.
I have a rather larger collection of spam
On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 17:23:38 -0500, David Levine said:
Non-qualified hostnames do get used, even to this list. I
looked at a small collection of spam and saw hardly any
random hostname parts, but the sample is biased (it got
through some filters) and very small.
Non-qualified hostnames get
Tom Lane wrote:
it would do to intentionally insert a couple of dots in the otherwise
random string, ie instead of ...@QcTLPy+DeAJLdhEN something like
...@QcTLP.y+DeA.JLdhEN.
Personally I'd be inclined to limit the characters used for the random
data to alphanumerics, too, to make it look
whatnow cooks up strings for executing external commands, and then feeds these
strings to popen or system.
these command strings rely on $SHELL being present - and if that is
not the case, then we get weird error messages
(sh: -c not found or similar).
(because both system() and popen() start
11 matches
Mail list logo