3:38 a.m.
On Wed, 2004-11-24 at 12:48 -0600, Nate Bradley wrote:
Why are my posts not showing up in fedora-list. I have a question
for
the list.
When asking such questions it is generally useful to provide the
Message-Id of the messages which are missing, and the precise date and
time at which they were first accepted by a mail server other than your
own. Including the response from the receiving server if possible, since
that often gives a local queue id for the same message.
--
dwmw2
5:57 a.m.
On Thu, 2004-11-25 at 09:38 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Wed, 2004-11-24 at 12:48 -0600, Nate Bradley wrote:
> Why are my posts not showing up in fedora-list. I have a question for
> the list.
When asking such questions it is generally useful to provide the
Message-Id of the messages which are missing, and the precise date and
time at which they were first accepted by a mail server other than your
own. Including the response from the receiving server if possible, since
that often gives a local queue id for the same message.
--
dwmw2
Just to cover the obvious, you do know that you have to be subscribed to
the list to post to it, Nate?
Matthew E. Lauterbach
3:14 a.m.
On Thu, 2004-11-25 at 05:57 -0600, Matthew E. Lauterbach wrote:
Just to cover the obvious, you do know that you have to be subscribed
to
the list to post to it, Nate?
He'd have received a bounce if he'd tried to post while unsubscribed,
which would have explained the problem.
--
dwmw2
8:08 a.m.
On Fri, 2004-11-26 at 09:14 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Thu, 2004-11-25 at 05:57 -0600, Matthew E. Lauterbach wrote:
> Just to cover the obvious, you do know that you have to be subscribed to
> the list to post to it, Nate?
He'd have received a bounce if he'd tried to post while unsubscribed,
which would have explained the problem.
That's funny. I don't.
8:20 a.m.
On Fri, 2004-11-26 at 08:08 -0600, Matthew E. Lauterbach wrote:
On Fri, 2004-11-26 at 09:14 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> He'd have received a bounce if he'd tried to post while unsubscribed,
> which would have explained the problem.
>
That's funny. I don't.
And not just because you are actually subscribed? That's odd. I do get
notification when I post to other fedora-* lists to which I'm not
subscribed.
--
dwmw2
8:46 a.m.
On Fri, 2004-11-26 at 14:20 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Fri, 2004-11-26 at 08:08 -0600, Matthew E. Lauterbach wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-11-26 at 09:14 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > He'd have received a bounce if he'd tried to post while unsubscribed,
> > which would have explained the problem.
> >
> That's funny. I don't.
And not just because you are actually subscribed? That's odd. I do get
notification when I post to other fedora-* lists to which I'm not
subscribed.
I've tried posting to fedora-list(a)redhat.com from this email address
(which has previously been a member of that list) and from my gmail
account (which has never been a member of that list). How long does it
take you to receive the bounce?
9:02 a.m.
On Fri, 2004-11-26 at 08:46 -0600, Matthew E. Lauterbach wrote:
I've tried posting to fedora-list(a)redhat.com from this email
address
(which has previously been a member of that list) and from my gmail
account (which has never been a member of that list). How long does it
take you to receive the bounce?
About 20 seconds (the outgoing and incoming servers in this case are in
different timezones, but both use NTP):
2004-11-26 09:53:18 1CXhTJ-0004Mh-0u <= dwmw2(a)infradead.org H=([172.16.18.64])
[213.86.99.236] P=esmtpsa X=TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256 A=cram:dwmw2 S=664
id=1101480793.8191.9570.camel(a)hades.cambridge.redhat.com
2004-11-26 09:53:20 1CXhTJ-0004Mh-0u => fedora-test-list(a)redhat.com R=lookuphost
T=remote_smtp H=mx3.redhat.com [66.187.233.32] C="250 2.0.0 iAQErINb028556 Message
accepted for delivery"
2004-11-26 14:53:37 1CXhTc-0002ky-LG <= fedora-test-list-bounces(a)redhat.com
H=hormel.redhat.com [209.132.177.30] P=esmtp S=1876
id=mailman.8458.1101480807.3257.fedora-test-list(a)redhat.com
2004-11-26 14:53:38 1CXhTc-0002ky-LG => dwmw2(a)baythorne.infradead.org
<dwmw2(a)infradead.org> R=lookuphost T=remote_smtp H=baythorne.ipv6.infradead.org
[2001:8b0:10b:1::1] X=TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256 C="250 OK id=1CXhTZ-0008DW-E6"
--
dwmw2
6:49 p.m.
On Fri, 2004-11-26 at 08:46 -0600, Matthew E. Lauterbach wrote:
I've tried posting to fedora-list(a)redhat.com from this email
address
(which has previously been a member of that list) and from my gmail
account (which has never been a member of that list). How long does it
take you to receive the bounce?
Bounces from mailman aren't actually sent as bounces -- they have a
non-empty reverse-path. Could it be that your mail routing for the
addresses in question are different? Can you receive _any_ mail from
@redhat.com addresses to that address? The redhat.com domain is
currently publishing a bogus SPF record which asks people to throw away
valid mail. If anything in your receiving path is checking SPF, you
should ask them to stop.
--
dwmw2
8:12 p.m.
On Sat, 2004-11-27 at 00:49 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
Bounces from mailman aren't actually sent as bounces -- they have
a
non-empty reverse-path. Could it be that your mail routing for the
addresses in question are different? Can you receive _any_ mail from
@redhat.com addresses to that address? The redhat.com domain is
currently publishing a bogus SPF record which asks people to throw away
valid mail. If anything in your receiving path is checking SPF, you
should ask them to stop.
The first time I tried was from this address from which I receive
fedora-devel-list(a)redhat.com and amd64-list(a)redhat.com messages
continually. I have also in the past used this address successfully to
receive fedora-list(a)redhat.com and fedora-test-list(a)redhat.com messages.
I have never had any problem with subscribing to, receiving from,
posting to, or unsubscribing from any list. The only problem is not
getting bounces when I am dumb and try to post to a list that I am not
currently subscribed to. I thought this was standard behavior for the
@redhat.com lists.
I don't believe that our mail servers are checking SPF or doing any sort
of spam blocking. I have no idea why I'm not getting them, but if you
are receiving them it must be a problem somewhere on my end. I
appreciate your willingness to help and explain even this trivial issue.
I will check things out on my end, but I do not want to drag this thread
further off-topic.
Matthew E. Lauterbach
7090
days inactive
7093
days old
9 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
David Woodhouse -
Matthew E. Lauterbach -
Nate Bradley