4:09 p.m.
TL;DR:
Emails I'm sending to this list take many hours until they reach this
list. Main problem 'tho is that shortly after sending them I'm getting
an error message from postmaster(a)outlook.com telling me about
unspecified errors regarding the mail transport. The message for this
is attached with this email.
Details:
I actually wanted to send this email to an admin responsible for this
list, but there's no one to find. And I encourage everyone not
familiar with a mess like below to simply ignore this message:
I hope 'tho that someone from the Fedora list admins has a look at it.
The problem seems to be on the side of the Fedora mail distribution
servers, that seem to be connected in one way or another with
outlook.com.
The error message below, that was sent to me after sending an email to
this list (via relay=mail.gmx.net. [212.227.17.190] - the message
itself can be seen at the very end of the forwarded message below) is
a mess, so it's not clear at all who is resposible for the fact that
my emails to this list are
1: first delivered with no problems that I'd know of to the Fedora
list's servers (see the default Fedora list footers attached to my
email that I sent, at the very end of this message, which seem to
indicate just that) and after that successfull delivery to the
fedora servers are
2: managed by some outlook.com servers (please see messages below),
that complain that
"(protection.outlook.com: domain of transitioning
lists.fedoraproject.org discourages use of 205.220.165.146 as
permitted sender)"
3: Additionally some y.antoniowatson(a)gmail.com is involved (see below).
Plus I checked my MTA (sendmail) logs: I have not sent this mail at
the very end to some y.antoniowatson(a)gmail.com, whoever this is ...
The email below, at the very end of this forwarded mail, obviously,
after successfully being sent to the fedora list servers, was handled
by outlook.com and lists.fedoraproject.org - and in the end delivered
to this list. After many hours.
So two questions to Fedora list admins (or anyone else who understands
the message attached)
1: Is my email address roto(a)gmx.net seen as a spammer address by the
Fedora list software?
2: Does anyone understand what happened according to the message
attached below from postmaster(a)outlook.com
Thanks in anticipation
Wolfgang
----- Forwarded message from postmaster(a)outlook.com -----
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2022 17:46:59 +0000
From: postmaster(a)outlook.com
Subject: Undeliverable: Re: Mailing lists and Discourse
To: roto(a)gmx.net
Delivery has failed to these recipients or groups:
y.antoniowatson@gmail.com<mailto:y.antoniowatson@gmail.com>
Your message wasn't delivered because the recipient's email provider rejected it.
Diagnostic information for administrators:
Generating server: PR3P189MB1017.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
y.antoniowatson(a)gmail.com
Remote Server returned '550-5.7.26 The MAIL FROM domain [gmx.net] has an SPF record
with a hard fail 550-5.7.26 policy (-all) but it fails to pass SPF checks with the ip:
550-5.7.26 [104.47.13.56]. To best protect our users from spam and phishing, 550-5.7.26
the message has been blocked. Please visit 550-5.7.26
https://support.google.com/mail/answer/81126#authentication for more 550 5.7.26
information. r20-20020a05640251d400b0045d4b7ad162si6801981edd.546 - gsmtp'
Original message headers:
Received: from AM7P189MB0759.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:20b:112::22)
by PR3P189MB1017.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:102:49::19) with
Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2,
cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.5746.28; Wed, 26 Oct
2022 17:46:59 +0000
Resent-From: <yurelw(a)outlook.com>
Received: from AM7P189MB0759.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([::1]) by
AM7P189MB0759.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::55cb:31af:f4b8:4802%7]) with
Microsoft SMTP Server id 15.20.5746.026; Wed, 26 Oct 2022 17:46:59 +0000
Authentication-Results: spf=softfail (sender IP is 205.220.165.146)
smtp.mailfrom=lists.fedoraproject.org; dkim=none (message not signed)
header.d=none;dmarc=fail action=none header.from=gmx.net;
Received-SPF: SoftFail (protection.outlook.com: domain of transitioning
lists.fedoraproject.org discourages use of 205.220.165.146 as permitted
sender)
X-IncomingTopHeaderMarker:
OriginalChecksum:5F996FCD486CB9A5DDC47F972D9B274246B5922993F5A04FD24DDE6016C7FBA6;UpperCasedChecksum:98B9C064274D738DF1836C2DE295FF7A3BECD580157A142003FD238176733849;SizeAsReceived:8269;Count:50
Authentication-Results-Original: ppops.net; spf=pass
smtp.mailfrom=users-bounces(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 bastion01.iad2.fedoraproject.org 34842309A1BC
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on
mailman01.iad2.fedoraproject.org
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,
DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE
autolearn=disabled version=3.4.0
X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2022 19:46:03 +0200
From: Wolfgang Pfeiffer <roto(a)gmx.net>
To: Community support for Fedora users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
Subject: Re: Mailing lists and Discourse
Message-ID: <Y1lyW5vQH38/PuKq@localhost>
References: <cf58117ae2537939313425e20d1e782174551b8f.camel(a)gmail.com>
<cone.1666658660.788601.74631.1004(a)monster.email-scan.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <cone.1666658660.788601.74631.1004(a)monster.email-scan.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/2.1.5 (2021-12-30)
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:9i1HzSehIxgsFHqIVzO2mpUH4B9K7b0QnEYEiU7URgdhSDf2X9h
g1fqP+oGWslID5hT+fny4KXifcqELWaTUlk0I3jS51vW08esUCcrgopgXXOkKutRlsYcjuI
FOMPb86JNAKy+XVatM0CeA5oEfhcRlgDZMeTu4yLutB64szWFTxq5YuiEvOzvLrcUF8/1g8
5p1ChPJCbltDiOeKiUgfg==
UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:KdSpR1RrdTo=;xRC5Z9PZSnzq7+mEMXcKufwJnlx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Message-ID-Hash: GKCG5AXR4DQWAVNOHFBJLNIHEV6GSTTC
X-Message-ID-Hash: GKCG5AXR4DQWAVNOHFBJLNIHEV6GSTTC
X-MailFrom: roto(a)gmx.net
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop;
banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-config-1; header-match-config-2;
header-match-config-3; header-match-users.lists.fedoraproject.org-0;
header-match-users.lists.fedoraproject.org-1;
header-match-users.lists.fedoraproject.org-2;
header-match-users.lists.fedoraproject.org-3;
header-match-users.lists.fedoraproject.org-4;
header-match-users.lists.fedoraproject.org-5; nonmember-moderation; administrivia;
implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.1.1
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Community support for Fedora users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
List-Id: Community support for Fedora users <users.lists.fedoraproject.org>
Archived-At:
<https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.o...
List-Archive:
<https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.o...
List-Help: <mailto:users-request@lists.fedoraproject.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:users@lists.fedoraproject.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:users-join@lists.fedoraproject.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
X-Proofpoint-GUID: NeBoWrY21wJ00SsHX8ZudHSgL2fSLCu1
X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: NeBoWrY21wJ00SsHX8ZudHSgL2fSLCu1
X-CLX-Response: 1TFkXGx4ZEQpMehccGhEKWUQXa1N9f1N6bVJhf3sRClhYF2UBaHhyHGN5WEt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=
X-CLX-Shades: MLX
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard
engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.895,Hydra:6.0.545,FMLib:17.11.122.1
definitions=2022-10-26_07,2022-10-26_01,2022-06-22_01
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=in_ext_notspam policy=in_ext score=0 bulkscore=0
unknownsenderscore=20
spamscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 suspectscore=0
impostorscore=0 priorityscore=60 mlxscore=0 adultscore=0 phishscore=0
malwarescore=0 clxscore=143 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx
scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2209130000 definitions=main-2210260100
domainage_hfrom=8722
X-IncomingHeaderCount: 50
Return-Path: roto(a)gmx.net
X-EOPAttributedMessage: 0
X-EOPTenantAttributedMessage: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa:0
X-MS-PublicTrafficType: Email
X-MS-TrafficTypeDiagnostic:
BN8NAM04FT038:EE_|GV1P189MB2148:EE_|AM7P189MB0759:EE_|PR3P189MB1017:EE_
X-MS-UserLastLogonTime: 10/26/2022 5:31:45 PM
X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 36ef44af-0bcf-47d6-2f48-08dab77a13c2
X-MS-Exchange-EOPDirect: true
X-Sender-IP: 205.220.165.146
X-SID-PRA: ROTO(a)GMX.NET
X-SID-Result: NONE
X-MS-Exchange-AtpMessageProperties: SA|SL
X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Oct 2022 17:46:56.9389
(UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 36ef44af-0bcf-47d6-2f48-08dab77a13c2
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: BN8NAM04FT038.eop-NAM04.prod.protection.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Anonymous
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Internet
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-RMS-PersistedConsumerOrg: 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: GV1P189MB2148
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-EndToEndLatency: 00:00:01.8242613
X-MS-Exchange-Processed-By-BccFoldering: 15.20.5746.026
X-MS-Exchange-Inbox-Rules-Loop: yurelw(a)outlook.com
X-OriginatorOrg: sct-15-20-4734-24-msonline-outlook-c54b5.templateTenant
Reporting-MTA: dns;PR3P189MB1017.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
Received-From-MTA: dns;AM7P189MB0759.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
Arrival-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2022 17:46:59 +0000
Final-Recipient: rfc822;y.antoniowatson(a)gmail.com
Action: failed
Status: 5.7.26
Diagnostic-Code: smtp;550-5.7.26 The MAIL FROM domain [gmx.net] has an SPF record with a
hard fail
550-5.7.26 policy (-all) but it fails to pass SPF checks with the ip:
550-5.7.26 [104.47.13.56]. To best protect our users from spam and phishing,
550-5.7.26 the message has been blocked. Please visit
550-5.7.26 https://support.google.com/mail/answer/81126#authentication for more
550 5.7.26 information. r20-20020a05640251d400b0045d4b7ad162si6801981edd.546 - gsmtp
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2022 19:46:03 +0200
From: Wolfgang Pfeiffer <roto(a)gmx.net>
Subject: Re: Mailing lists and Discourse
Reply-To: Community support for Fedora users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
To: Community support for Fedora users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/2.1.5 (2021-12-30)
On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 08:44:20PM -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
I've been observing, from the sidelines, the devolution of mailing
lists, Usenet, and IRC into web-based discussion forums of various
flavors; getting the bar lowered to the level of Twooter, Spacebook,
and TokTik, and more of the same. It takes more mental effort and
discipline to participate meaningfully in the former, but much less in
the latter. It's a much lower barrier of entry; hence this latest
episode with Gnome.
Nailed it: Twooter, Spacebook, TokTik.
Devolution - whatever you call it - in the West seems to be a fact in
many fields. Whereas intellectually and when it comes to patents
Asians are getting a lot better over the last years. 2021 more than
50% of patent filings [*] came from Asia (China 25.1%, Japan 18.1%,
Republic of Korea 7.5%), USA 21.5% and Germany 6.2% - this is a total
reverse from the numbers of 1994: US were No.1, Germany #2, Japan #4,
Korea #18, China #21.
But yes: Let's all be happy with a few butttons to press.
"Press Green" > "Say yes" > "Now Go away"
Wolfgang
[*] https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pctndocs/en/2022/pct_news_2022_02.pdf
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
----- End forwarded message -----
4:31 p.m.
New subject: [Undeliverable: Re: Mailing lists and Discourse]
You will find the crux here:
Generating server: PR3P189MB1017.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
y.antoniowatson(a)gmail.com
Remote Server returned '550-5.7.26 The MAIL FROM domain [gmx.net] has an SPF record
with a hard fail 550-5.7.26 policy (-all)
That means, a participating server checks, if the domain in your mail address allows the
domain of the server it receives the mail from, to handle mail from that domain.
Fedora mailing list doesn’t check the SPF record, but the list membership of the sender.
The fedora project.org domain (e.g. some_one(a)fedoraproject.org) checks the SPF record.
For a detailed analyses we would need the complete mail header.
Am 27.10.2022 um 23:09 schrieb Wolfgang Pfeiffer
<roto(a)gmx.net>:
TL;DR:
Emails I'm sending to this list take many hours until they reach this
list. Main problem 'tho is that shortly after sending them I'm getting
an error message from postmaster(a)outlook.com telling me about
unspecified errors regarding the mail transport. The message for this
is attached with this email.
Details:
I actually wanted to send this email to an admin responsible for this
list, but there's no one to find. And I encourage everyone not
familiar with a mess like below to simply ignore this message:
I hope 'tho that someone from the Fedora list admins has a look at it.
The problem seems to be on the side of the Fedora mail distribution
servers, that seem to be connected in one way or another with
outlook.com.
The error message below, that was sent to me after sending an email to
this list (via relay=mail.gmx.net. [212.227.17.190] - the message
itself can be seen at the very end of the forwarded message below) is
a mess, so it's not clear at all who is resposible for the fact that
my emails to this list are
1: first delivered with no problems that I'd know of to the Fedora
list's servers (see the default Fedora list footers attached to my
email that I sent, at the very end of this message, which seem to
indicate just that) and after that successfull delivery to the
fedora servers are
2: managed by some outlook.com servers (please see messages below),
that complain that
"(protection.outlook.com: domain of transitioning
lists.fedoraproject.org discourages use of 205.220.165.146 as
permitted sender)"
3: Additionally some y.antoniowatson(a)gmail.com is involved (see below).
Plus I checked my MTA (sendmail) logs: I have not sent this mail at
the very end to some y.antoniowatson(a)gmail.com, whoever this is ...
The email below, at the very end of this forwarded mail, obviously,
after successfully being sent to the fedora list servers, was handled
by outlook.com and lists.fedoraproject.org - and in the end delivered
to this list. After many hours.
So two questions to Fedora list admins (or anyone else who understands
the message attached)
1: Is my email address roto(a)gmx.net seen as a spammer address by the
Fedora list software?
2: Does anyone understand what happened according to the message
attached below from postmaster(a)outlook.com
Thanks in anticipation
Wolfgang
----- Forwarded message from postmaster(a)outlook.com -----
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2022 17:46:59 +0000
From: postmaster(a)outlook.com
Subject: Undeliverable: Re: Mailing lists and Discourse
To: roto(a)gmx.net
Delivery has failed to these recipients or groups:
y.antoniowatson@gmail.com<mailto:y.antoniowatson@gmail.com>
Your message wasn't delivered because the recipient's email provider rejected
it.
Diagnostic information for administrators:
Generating server: PR3P189MB1017.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
y.antoniowatson(a)gmail.com
Remote Server returned '550-5.7.26 The MAIL FROM domain [gmx.net] has an SPF record
with a hard fail 550-5.7.26 policy (-all) but it fails to pass SPF checks with the ip:
550-5.7.26 [104.47.13.56]. To best protect our users from spam and phishing, 550-5.7.26
the message has been blocked. Please visit 550-5.7.26
https://support.google.com/mail/answer/81126#authentication for more 550 5.7.26
information. r20-20020a05640251d400b0045d4b7ad162si6801981edd.546 - gsmtp'
Original message headers:
Received: from AM7P189MB0759.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:20b:112::22)
by PR3P189MB1017.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:102:49::19) with
Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2,
cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.5746.28; Wed, 26 Oct
2022 17:46:59 +0000
Resent-From: <yurelw(a)outlook.com>
Received: from AM7P189MB0759.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([::1]) by
AM7P189MB0759.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::55cb:31af:f4b8:4802%7]) with
Microsoft SMTP Server id 15.20.5746.026; Wed, 26 Oct 2022 17:46:59 +0000
Authentication-Results: spf=softfail (sender IP is 205.220.165.146)
smtp.mailfrom=lists.fedoraproject.org; dkim=none (message not signed)
header.d=none;dmarc=fail action=none header.from=gmx.net;
Received-SPF: SoftFail (protection.outlook.com: domain of transitioning
lists.fedoraproject.org discourages use of 205.220.165.146 as permitted
sender)
X-IncomingTopHeaderMarker:
OriginalChecksum:5F996FCD486CB9A5DDC47F972D9B274246B5922993F5A04FD24DDE6016C7FBA6;UpperCasedChecksum:98B9C064274D738DF1836C2DE295FF7A3BECD580157A142003FD238176733849;SizeAsReceived:8269;Count:50
Authentication-Results-Original: ppops.net; spf=pass
smtp.mailfrom=users-bounces(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 bastion01.iad2.fedoraproject.org 34842309A1BC
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on
mailman01.iad2.fedoraproject.org
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,
DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE
autolearn=disabled version=3.4.0
X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2022 19:46:03 +0200
From: Wolfgang Pfeiffer <roto(a)gmx.net>
To: Community support for Fedora users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
Subject: Re: Mailing lists and Discourse
Message-ID: <Y1lyW5vQH38/PuKq@localhost>
References: <cf58117ae2537939313425e20d1e782174551b8f.camel(a)gmail.com>
<cone.1666658660.788601.74631.1004(a)monster.email-scan.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <cone.1666658660.788601.74631.1004(a)monster.email-scan.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/2.1.5 (2021-12-30)
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:9i1HzSehIxgsFHqIVzO2mpUH4B9K7b0QnEYEiU7URgdhSDf2X9h
g1fqP+oGWslID5hT+fny4KXifcqELWaTUlk0I3jS51vW08esUCcrgopgXXOkKutRlsYcjuI
FOMPb86JNAKy+XVatM0CeA5oEfhcRlgDZMeTu4yLutB64szWFTxq5YuiEvOzvLrcUF8/1g8
5p1ChPJCbltDiOeKiUgfg==
UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:KdSpR1RrdTo=;xRC5Z9PZSnzq7+mEMXcKufwJnlx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Message-ID-Hash: GKCG5AXR4DQWAVNOHFBJLNIHEV6GSTTC
X-Message-ID-Hash: GKCG5AXR4DQWAVNOHFBJLNIHEV6GSTTC
X-MailFrom: roto(a)gmx.net
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop;
banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-config-1; header-match-config-2;
header-match-config-3; header-match-users.lists.fedoraproject.org-0;
header-match-users.lists.fedoraproject.org-1;
header-match-users.lists.fedoraproject.org-2;
header-match-users.lists.fedoraproject.org-3;
header-match-users.lists.fedoraproject.org-4;
header-match-users.lists.fedoraproject.org-5; nonmember-moderation; administrivia;
implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.1.1
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Community support for Fedora users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
List-Id: Community support for Fedora users <users.lists.fedoraproject.org>
Archived-At:
<https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.o...
List-Archive:
<https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.o...
List-Help: <mailto:users-request@lists.fedoraproject.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:users@lists.fedoraproject.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:users-join@lists.fedoraproject.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
X-Proofpoint-GUID: NeBoWrY21wJ00SsHX8ZudHSgL2fSLCu1
X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: NeBoWrY21wJ00SsHX8ZudHSgL2fSLCu1
X-CLX-Response: 1TFkXGx4ZEQpMehccGhEKWUQXa1N9f1N6bVJhf3sRClhYF2UBaHhyHGN5WEt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=
X-CLX-Shades: MLX
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard
engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.895,Hydra:6.0.545,FMLib:17.11.122.1
definitions=2022-10-26_07,2022-10-26_01,2022-06-22_01
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=in_ext_notspam policy=in_ext score=0 bulkscore=0
unknownsenderscore=20
spamscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 suspectscore=0
impostorscore=0 priorityscore=60 mlxscore=0 adultscore=0 phishscore=0
malwarescore=0 clxscore=143 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx
scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2209130000 definitions=main-2210260100
domainage_hfrom=8722
X-IncomingHeaderCount: 50
Return-Path: roto(a)gmx.net
X-EOPAttributedMessage: 0
X-EOPTenantAttributedMessage: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa:0
X-MS-PublicTrafficType: Email
X-MS-TrafficTypeDiagnostic:
BN8NAM04FT038:EE_|GV1P189MB2148:EE_|AM7P189MB0759:EE_|PR3P189MB1017:EE_
X-MS-UserLastLogonTime: 10/26/2022 5:31:45 PM
X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 36ef44af-0bcf-47d6-2f48-08dab77a13c2
X-MS-Exchange-EOPDirect: true
X-Sender-IP: 205.220.165.146
X-SID-PRA: ROTO(a)GMX.NET
X-SID-Result: NONE
X-MS-Exchange-AtpMessageProperties: SA|SL
X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Oct 2022 17:46:56.9389
(UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 36ef44af-0bcf-47d6-2f48-08dab77a13c2
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource:
BN8NAM04FT038.eop-NAM04.prod.protection.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Anonymous
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Internet
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-RMS-PersistedConsumerOrg: 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: GV1P189MB2148
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-EndToEndLatency: 00:00:01.8242613
X-MS-Exchange-Processed-By-BccFoldering: 15.20.5746.026
X-MS-Exchange-Inbox-Rules-Loop: yurelw(a)outlook.com
X-OriginatorOrg: sct-15-20-4734-24-msonline-outlook-c54b5.templateTenant
Reporting-MTA: dns;PR3P189MB1017.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
Received-From-MTA: dns;AM7P189MB0759.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
Arrival-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2022 17:46:59 +0000
Final-Recipient: rfc822;y.antoniowatson(a)gmail.com
Action: failed
Status: 5.7.26
Diagnostic-Code: smtp;550-5.7.26 The MAIL FROM domain [gmx.net] has an SPF record with a
hard fail
550-5.7.26 policy (-all) but it fails to pass SPF checks with the ip:
550-5.7.26 [104.47.13.56]. To best protect our users from spam and phishing,
550-5.7.26 the message has been blocked. Please visit
550-5.7.26 https://support.google.com/mail/answer/81126#authentication for more
550 5.7.26 information. r20-20020a05640251d400b0045d4b7ad162si6801981edd.546 - gsmtp
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2022 19:46:03 +0200
From: Wolfgang Pfeiffer <roto(a)gmx.net>
Subject: Re: Mailing lists and Discourse
Reply-To: Community support for Fedora users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
To: Community support for Fedora users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/2.1.5 (2021-12-30)
On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 08:44:20PM -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
>
> I've been observing, from the sidelines, the devolution of mailing
> lists, Usenet, and IRC into web-based discussion forums of various
> flavors; getting the bar lowered to the level of Twooter, Spacebook,
> and TokTik, and more of the same. It takes more mental effort and
> discipline to participate meaningfully in the former, but much less in
> the latter. It's a much lower barrier of entry; hence this latest
> episode with Gnome.
>
Nailed it: Twooter, Spacebook, TokTik.
Devolution - whatever you call it - in the West seems to be a fact in
many fields. Whereas intellectually and when it comes to patents
Asians are getting a lot better over the last years. 2021 more than
50% of patent filings [*] came from Asia (China 25.1%, Japan 18.1%,
Republic of Korea 7.5%), USA 21.5% and Germany 6.2% - this is a total
reverse from the numbers of 1994: US were No.1, Germany #2, Japan #4,
Korea #18, China #21.
But yes: Let's all be happy with a few butttons to press.
"Press Green" > "Say yes" > "Now Go away"
Wolfgang
[*] https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pctndocs/en/2022/pct_news_2022_02.pdf
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
----- End forwarded message -----
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
5:11 p.m.
New subject: [Undeliverable: Re: Mailing lists and Discourse]
On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 11:31:32PM +0200, Peter Boy wrote:
You will find the crux here:
> Generating server: PR3P189MB1017.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
>
> y.antoniowatson(a)gmail.com
> Remote Server returned '550-5.7.26 The MAIL FROM domain [gmx.net] has an SPF
record with a hard fail 550-5.7.26 policy (-all)
That means, a participating server checks, if the domain in your mail address allows the
domain of the server it receives the mail from, to handle mail from that domain.
Fedora mailing list doesn’t check the SPF record, but the list membership of the sender.
The fedora project.org domain (e.g. some_one(a)fedoraproject.org) checks the SPF record.
For a detailed analyses we would need the complete mail header.
Here it is, until the start of what I sent previously:
From [deleted local user name] Wed Oct 26 20:13:48 2022
Return-Path: <>
Authentication-Results: gmx.net; dkim=none
Received: from pop.gmx.net [212.227.17.185]
by aw17 with POP3 (fetchmail-6.4.31)
for <[deleted local user name]@localhost> (single-drop); Wed, 26 Oct 2022 20:13:48
+0200 (CEST)
Received: from EUR04-HE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([40.92.73.83])
by mx-ha.gmx.net (mxgmx105 [212.227.17.5]) with ESMTPS (Nemesis) id
1MRVu9-1oSUk40C4j-00NTdY for <roto(a)gmx.net>; Wed, 26 Oct 2022 19:47:01 +0200
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none;
b=PWeRCZ6a2n3J+DRh44rwChIELQ/R/KfoR/4blbeiySCcMzvY606h6iTgDnQxZcFSkrnSHjuxaxsbNsX24rPWc0R6ccREir3dzUHyhjh/s3z39Hn9MBzaT2JjUFrDPjAp93GJYjY2TQsU6mHLyhbxGeoIt4ZEZ2ooJX5PIi5EEWi653UHVWx/0vOL+1TVJWx5giNcNaQMdxsbqurvZKoNw+1kuMYr9c5RAVNLN6YbJrTW3g+vaa9XG24fTMlS602NS+NdPB/5lLaoAHR434XeDr31VuqRYTaiAPgMrOHFgEKF1LwJ6Fh0ANAqKYF9zoJuj5dkqjprbk3/ZdO0pmiKHw==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com;
s=arcselector9901;
h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1;
bh=/9xAfIEoMqimsaETAAuNGp1HZXWUFVCQLyfW48vk8MY=;
b=AfHHETEFTD5CKw2JWy8GuJyt6lQh7QlB6ut+QVQ92GddHlzBkaveC/QyHx4aS76sFFA9+DRZAv2UaIn+uVRgOSRsbjxfa5UFJ+TDFASA2r6FKH8EwF7GUtpaWJdMf/hxOXCmcix8CnmFa+4E8bTX7cEqj8F4AHJ/R2UzLD64ZyvS/hSAbyLPJGU96Piuysn4fOhBrBZCwbcCsMRqCljHsrzlE7YKe5BBpc6N9nLUJC73z0FShcYvQjnxA9yMTPBWOBRc/biFovRCVwVZuZZGLGjYIxRLOwi5WCT+PH27SqbrqC4RFArQHLTrw9tHOgfgyYK/uKwa7XSEocc33Y4jMQ==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=none; dmarc=none;
dkim=none; arc=none
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: <postmaster(a)outlook.com>
To: <roto(a)gmx.net>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2022 17:46:59 +0000
Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status;
boundary="ffe1cfd7-ef85-44e8-90bd-5cf0153d3334"
X-MS-Exchange-Message-Is-Ndr:
Content-Language: en-US
Message-ID:
<01b97988-1737-4713-91bd-b1f8bf073a9d(a)PR3P189MB1017.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
In-Reply-To: <Y1lyW5vQH38/PuKq@localhost>
References: <cf58117ae2537939313425e20d1e782174551b8f.camel(a)gmail.com>
<cone.1666658660.788601.74631.1004(a)monster.email-scan.com>
<Y1lyW5vQH38/PuKq@localhost>
Subject: Undeliverable: Re: Mailing lists and Discourse
Auto-Submitted: auto-replied
X-MS-PublicTrafficType: Email
X-MS-TrafficTypeDiagnostic: PR3P189MB1017:EE_
X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;
X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info:
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
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount: 1
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:
3BwDEJkbHjIkudNTR2jA+GTuFzwkUynkakMP1IwFN2XbEVOc0ucfoVinlvu+P5bLL+dZVBPqwhD2NC7DxgbeAfEKauybAO3or6Wmda8nqjgRAi50NSLyqv+AkC0Vn1I1w5zWNp1Sae1Hpw9UwCSI5nl2XJ7Raqg66WvrdfjcZubbC3O7GX24Sj/PHrH97jqB
X-OriginatorOrg: outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Oct 2022 17:46:59.8484
(UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: PR3P189MB1017.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id:
48d4035b-0ca8-4713-61f9-08dab77a155a
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: PR3P189MB1017
Envelope-To: <roto(a)gmx.net>
X-GMX-Antispam: 0 (Mail was not recognized as spam); Detail=V3;
X-Spam-Flag: NO
UI-InboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:JDqinlFAsic=;DTVAO+mvSLRnn4sR3JTIQTSQBzvP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X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.5
Status: RO
Content-Length: 31487
Lines: 579
--ffe1cfd7-ef85-44e8-90bd-5cf0153d3334
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; differences=Content-Type;
boundary="9ac6c79d-b04c-4c7d-ab33-592a4fc449ca"
--9ac6c79d-b04c-4c7d-ab33-592a4fc449ca
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Delivery has failed to these recipients or groups:
y.antoniowatson@gmail.com<mailto:y.antoniowatson@gmail.com>
Your message wasn't delivered because the recipient's email provider reject=
ed it.
Diagnostic information for administrators:
Generating server: PR3P189MB1017.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
y.antoniowatson(a)gmail.com
Remote Server returned '550-5.7.26 The MAIL FROM domain [gmx.net] has an SP=
F record with a hard fail 550-5.7.26 policy (-all) but it fails to pass SPF=
checks with the ip: 550-5.7.26 [104.47.13.56]. To best protect our users f=
rom spam and phishing, 550-5.7.26 the message has been blocked. Please visi=
t 550-5.7.26 https://support.google.com/mail/answer/81126#authentication fo=
r more 550 5.7.26 information. r20-20020a05640251d400b0045d4b7ad162si680198=
1edd.546 - gsmtp'
Original message headers:
[ ... ]
5:17 p.m.
New subject: [Undeliverable: Re: Mailing lists and Discourse]
On 10/27/22 15:11, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote:
Received: from pop.gmx.net [212.227.17.185]
by aw17 with POP3 (fetchmail-6.4.31)
for <[deleted local user name]@localhost> (single-drop); Wed, 26
Oct 2022 20:13:48 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from EUR04-HE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com
([40.92.73.83])
by mx-ha.gmx.net (mxgmx105 [212.227.17.5]) with ESMTPS (Nemesis) id
1MRVu9-1oSUk40C4j-00NTdY for <roto(a)gmx.net>; Wed, 26 Oct 2022 19:47:01
+0200
This undeliverable message is coming from outlook.com, not the mailing list.
Diagnostic information for administrators:
Generating server: PR3P189MB1017.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
y.antoniowatson(a)gmail.com
Remote Server returned '550-5.7.26 The MAIL FROM domain [gmx.net] has an
SP=
F record with a hard fail 550-5.7.26 policy (-all) but it fails to pass
SPF=
checks with the ip: 550-5.7.26 [104.47.13.56]. To best protect our
users f=
rom spam and phishing, 550-5.7.26 the message has been blocked. Please
visi=
t 550-5.7.26 https://support.google.com/mail/answer/81126#authentication
fo=
r more 550 5.7.26 information.
r20-20020a05640251d400b0045d4b7ad162si680198=
1edd.546 - gsmtp'
This is the problem. The server either doesn't like the SPF policy or
the received message fails the SPF policy. Maybe the mailing list
admins will have to add gmx.net to the list of hidden senders.
6:01 p.m.
New subject: [Undeliverable: Re: Mailing lists and Discourse]
On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 03:17:31PM -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 10/27/22 15:11, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote:
>Received: from pop.gmx.net [212.227.17.185]
> by aw17 with POP3 (fetchmail-6.4.31)
> for <[deleted local user name]@localhost> (single-drop); Wed,
>26 Oct 2022 20:13:48 +0200 (CEST)
>Received: from EUR04-HE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com
>([40.92.73.83])
> by mx-ha.gmx.net (mxgmx105 [212.227.17.5]) with ESMTPS (Nemesis) id
> 1MRVu9-1oSUk40C4j-00NTdY for <roto(a)gmx.net>; Wed, 26 Oct 2022
>19:47:01 +0200
This undeliverable message is coming from outlook.com, not the mailing list.
>Diagnostic information for administrators:
>
>Generating server: PR3P189MB1017.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
>
>y.antoniowatson(a)gmail.com
>Remote Server returned '550-5.7.26 The MAIL FROM domain [gmx.net]
>has an SP=
>F record with a hard fail 550-5.7.26 policy (-all) but it fails to
>pass SPF=
> checks with the ip: 550-5.7.26 [104.47.13.56]. To best protect our
>users f=
>rom spam and phishing, 550-5.7.26 the message has been blocked.
>Please visi=
>t 550-5.7.26
>https://support.google.com/mail/answer/81126#authentication fo=
>r more 550 5.7.26 information.
>r20-20020a05640251d400b0045d4b7ad162si680198=
>1edd.546 - gsmtp'
This is the problem. The server either doesn't like the SPF policy or
the received message fails the SPF policy. Maybe the mailing list
admins will have to add gmx.net to the list of hidden senders.
Which server does not like GMX: gmail.com, outlook.com? - I didn't
send anything to both of them: here's the complete sendmail log for
the respective mail transfer:
-----------------------
Oct 26 19:46:03 aw17 sendmail[581085]: 29QHk3BI581085: from=roto(a)gmx.net, size=1738,
class=0, nrcpts=1, msgid=<Y1lyW5vQH38/PuKq@localhost>, relay=[local user name
deleted]@localh
ost
Oct 26 19:46:03 aw17 sendmail[581085]: STARTTLS=client, relay=[127.0.0.1],
version=TLSv1.3, verify=FAIL, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384, bits=256/256
Oct 26 19:46:03 aw17 sendmail[581086]: STARTTLS=server, relay=aw17 [127.0.0.1],
version=TLSv1.3, verify=NO, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384, bits=256/256
Oct 26 19:46:18 aw17 sendmail[581086]: 29QHk34B581086: from=<roto(a)gmx.net>,
size=1907, class=0, nrcpts=1, msgid=<Y1lyW5vQH38/PuKq@localhost>, proto=ESMTPS, dae
mon=MTA, relay=aw17 [127.0.0.1]
Oct 26 19:46:18 aw17 sendmail[581085]: 29QHk3BI581085: to=users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
ctladdr=roto(a)gmx.net (1000/1000), delay=00:00:15, xdelay=00:00:15, mai
ler=relay, pri=31738, relay=[127.0.0.1] [127.0.0.1], dsn=2.0.0, stat=Sent (29QHk34B581086
Message accepted for delivery)
Oct 26 19:46:28 aw17 sendmail[581215]: STARTTLS=client, relay=mail.gmx.net.,
version=TLSv1.3, verify=OK, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384, bits=256/256
Oct 26 19:46:29 aw17 sendmail[581215]: 29QHk34B581086:
to=<users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>, delay=00:00:11, xdelay=00:00:11, mailer=smtp,
pri=31907, relay=mail.
gmx.net. [212.227.17.168], dsn=2.0.0, stat=Sent (Requested mail action okay, completed:
id=1M2f9b-1omw4Q0cIR-004AjY)
-----------------
And two:
I don't use any hidden sender address: see mail log above: my real
email address, plus the legit "relay=mail.gmx.net" being used for mail
transfer.
The only thing I could think of is that in RAM - and only there - some
wrong settings are stored, that I changed one or two weeks ago, and
that I restored later on to current and correct settings: But again:
see results above in the sendmail log: seems all fine: correct email
address and mail relays seem being used.
But again: who is the complaining y.antoniowatson(a)gmail.com - I don't
even remember this address, nor does it show up in my mail logs .. :)
Wolfgang
6:09 p.m.
New subject: [Undeliverable: Re: Mailing lists and Discourse]
On 10/27/22 16:01, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote:
On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 03:17:31PM -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> This is the problem. The server either doesn't like the SPF policy or
> the received message fails the SPF policy. Maybe the mailing list
> admins will have to add gmx.net to the list of hidden senders.
Which server does not like GMX: gmail.com, outlook.com? - I didn't
send anything to both of them: here's the complete sendmail log for
the respective mail transfer:
outlook.com doesn't like the gmx.net email redirected from the mailing
list. You didn't send it, the mailing list did.
And two:
I don't use any hidden sender address: see mail log above: my real
email address, plus the legit "relay=mail.gmx.net" being used for mail
transfer.
I didn't say you were. The mailing list hides some email addresses
because of this SPF issue. You'll see them as "via users" in the From
field. e.g. Todd:
ToddAndMargo via users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
But again: who is the complaining y.antoniowatson(a)gmail.com - I
don't
even remember this address, nor does it show up in my mail logs .. :)
Someone on the mailing list.
6:37 a.m.
New subject: [Undeliverable: Re: Mailing lists and Discourse]
Samuel Sieb writes:
This is the problem. The server either doesn't like the SPF
policy or the
received message fails the SPF policy. Maybe the mailing list admins will
have to add gmx.net to the list of hidden senders.
I run very stringent SPF checks, and to my knowledge I have no issues
accepting this mailing list's traffic.
4:38 p.m.
On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 11:09:35PM +0200, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote:
The error message below, that was sent to me after sending an email
to
this list (via relay=mail.gmx.net. [212.227.17.190] - the message
wrong: IP should say [212.227.17.168]
itself can be seen at the very end of the forwarded message below) is
a mess, so it's not clear at all who is resposible for the fact that
my emails to this list are
Sorry,
Wolfgang
4:54 p.m.
New subject: [Undeliverable: Re: Mailing lists and Discourse]
Am 27.10.2022 um 23:38 schrieb Wolfgang Pfeiffer
<roto(a)gmx.net>:
On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 11:09:35PM +0200, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote:
> The error message below, that was sent to me after sending an email to
> this list (via relay=mail.gmx.net. [212.227.17.190] - the message
wrong: IP should say [212.227.17.168]
The IP itself is not the problem. The Problem is, that one of the servers checks the SPF
record
Remote Server returned '550-5.7.26 The MAIL FROM domain [gmx.net]
has an SPF record with a hard fail 550-5.7.26 policy (-all)
And according to my knowledge it is not the Fedora mailing list server.
--
Peter Boy
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pboy
pboy(a)fedoraproject.org
Timezone: CET (UTC+1) / CEST (UTC+2)
Fedora Server Edition Working Group member
Fedora docs team contributor
Java developer and enthusiast
8:42 p.m.
On Thu, 2022-10-27 at 23:09 +0200, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote:
2: Does anyone understand what happened according to the message
attached below from postmaster(a)outlook.com
I saw the message in question, it came through yesterday. My guess is
that it's not your problem, but Gmail's. I've seen this kind of thing
before. In your list of quoted headers there was this:
Final-Recipient: rfc822;y.antoniowatson(a)gmail.com
I'm guessing that an email from the list going to him has failed
Gmail's spam sensors (as often happens), and because its an email from
you, you're the one getting the failed to deliver message.
Gmail seems to have a problem with mailing lists. Heck knows why, it
ought to know how they work, by now. The problem being that when you
post through through the list, *it* is not an authorised sender for you
(you're still the email's from address). Your ISP is an authorised
sender for you.
You''ll notice that my messages don't come from my address, but the
list server has changed them to:
Tim via users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
And I see the same for some other people.
I think this is the list's approach to re-authoring certain addresses
to deal with dumb mail receivers. I don't have a problem with this, as
I don't want any private replies. And there are other approaches to
still enable private replies, such as I can see the list has CC'd me
(though I'm only getting one message, not two).
--
uname -rsvp
Linux 3.10.0-1160.76.1.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Wed Aug 10 16:21:17 UTC 2022 x86_64
Boilerplate: All unexpected mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted.
I will only get to see the messages that are posted to the mailing list.
1:40 p.m.
On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 10:43 PM Tim via users <
users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
Gmail seems to have a problem with mailing lists. Heck knows why, it
ought to know how they work, by now. The problem being that when you
post through through the list, *it* is not an authorised sender for you
(you're still the email's from address). Your ISP is an authorised
sender for you.
I use gmail for lists. For a few list, gmail flags some messages as SPAM
unitil I have clicked on "not spam" a few times. The resulting discussions
mentioned issues with DMARC (which can use SPF and/or DKIM) -- yet
another part of the overhead running a mail list.
--
George N. White III
2:51 p.m.
On Fri, 2022-10-28 at 15:40 -0300, George N. White III wrote:
I use gmail for lists.
I'm still using Yahoo for lists. When I first started using mailing
lists, yahoo was the biggest source of spam coming into them, so I
figured they deserved to be the recipient. And they seem better at not
false-flagging things as spam than gmail.
For a few list, gmail flags some messages as SPAM unitil I have
clicked on "not spam" a few times. The resulting discussions
mentioned issues with DMARC (which can use SPF and/or DKIM) -- yet
another part of the overhead running a mail list.
One the hesitations I have with recommending gmail to non-tech people
is that they nearly always have to check their spam folder regularly
and mark real mail as non-spam. But they don't. It false-flags way
too many things.
--
NB: All unexpected mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted.
I will only get to see the messages that are posted to the list.
The following system info data is generated fresh for each post:
uname -rsvp
Linux 5.19.15-201.fc36.x86_64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Thu Oct 13
18:58:38 UTC 2022 x86_64
8:01 a.m.
On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 12:12:21PM +1030, Tim via users wrote:
On Thu, 2022-10-27 at 23:09 +0200, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote:
> 2: Does anyone understand what happened according to the message
> attached below from postmaster(a)outlook.com
[ ... ]
You''ll notice that my messages don't come from my address, but the
list server has changed them to:
Tim via users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
And I see the same for some other people.
I think this is the list's approach to re-authoring certain addresses
to deal with dumb mail receivers. I don't have a problem with this, as
I don't want any private replies. And there are other approaches to
still enable private replies, such as I can see the list has CC'd me
(though I'm only getting one message, not two).
I wouldn't have a problem with the list maintainers setting up a
similiar procedure like in your case to deliver my emails to this
list - if it solves the problem: great!
So yes: this email is explicitly meant to be also read the Fedora list
administrators.
Wolfgang
9:01 a.m.
Wolfgang Pfeiffer writes:
On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 12:12:21PM +1030, Tim via users wrote:
>You''ll notice that my messages don't come from my
address, but the
>list server has changed them to:
>
> Tim via users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
>
>And I see the same for some other people.
>
>I think this is the list's approach to re-authoring certain addresses
>to deal with dumb mail receivers.
This is specifically to deal with the DMARC "from alignment" problem,
which allows a domain to publish a restriction on who may use their
domain in From. This restriction is respected by most receivers.
Mailing list break both of the authentication protocols. This means
that if the DMARC policy of the author's domain is "reject", receivers
should refuse mail sent via mailing lists. So mailing lists
substitute an address in their domain which they can authenticate to
receivers.
However, with respect to Wolfgang's posts, the official DMARC (RFC
7489) protocol is not involved here since gmx.net publishes a policy
of "none", which means receivers should take no action merely on the
basis of failure of From alignment. That said, the reason Google gave
for refusing your email is based on From alignment. I suspect they
have other reasons, my own organization (a university that has
pretensions to world-class STEM research :-( ) marked your post as
SPAM. Sorry, I can't tell you what the rationale is, the reason
report is encoded. I myself don't see anything spammy about any of
your posts. :-(
I wouldn't have a problem with the list maintainers setting up a
similiar procedure like in your case to deliver my emails to this
list - if it solves the problem: great!
I don't think there is a problem with the lists. I suppose Fedora
lists have thousands of subscribers. The weird thing is that you only
received a few Delivery Status Notices (DSN). If something were
broken in the lists you'd get thousands.
I think that what is happening is that either there are a couple of
broken receiver sites that sent DSNs to you rather than the list which
should handle them, or (quite unlikely) Fedora has disabled the
Mailman default of requesting that errors be sent to Mailman which
knows how to parse several dozen styles of DSN, and if it can't sends
to the list administrator (not to the author).
The logic is that although the author sent the mail, the list chooses
the recipients, and if the mail is bad (eg, spam) the list shouldn't
send it at all, and if it's something idiosyncratic at the receiver
(typically disk full or no such user), there's nothing the author of
the post can do anyway (the list can and does disable delivery or even
unsubscribe subscribers who produce lots of DSNs).
So yes: this email is explicitly meant to be also read the Fedora
list
administrators.
There are addresses specifically for that purpose. It is very
frequently the case that list admins manage many lists they are not
subscribed to. If you have specific requests for the list admins, use
the -owner address.
But think carefully about whether you need to do that. It's very
likely they'll just tell you what I just told you, and there's nothing
they can do. If you repeatedly get DSNs from the same domain, you can
send them to the list owner, and they might unsubscribe those
accounts. But that's up to them.
2:57 p.m.
On Sun, Oct 30, 2022 at 11:01:55PM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
However, with respect to Wolfgang's posts, the official DMARC (RFC
7489) protocol is not involved here since gmx.net publishes a policy
of "none", which means receivers should take no action merely on the
basis of failure of From alignment. That said, the reason Google gave
for refusing your email is based on From alignment. I suspect they
have other reasons, my own organization (a university that has
pretensions to world-class STEM research :-( ) marked your post as
SPAM.
Good to know.
Sorry, I can't tell you what the rationale is, the reason
report is encoded. I myself don't see anything spammy about any of
your posts. :-(
I'm using this email address since around 20 years - and I actually
see since a few years occasionally that emails I sent to recipients I
know personally are probably tagged as spam - meaning, recipients only
find them after having a look to their spam folders. It rarely
happened, but it happened.
I know some "let's save the world" chain mail senders (one topic
something along the line of: "Don't eat chocolate from the bad guys" -
no kidding) sent me emails I wasn't interested in: they put my email
address together with hundreds of others into the Cc: header - didn't
happen too often, but I suspect often enough to ruin the non-spam
status of my address.
Lesson taken: don't give your email address to people that don't know
what they're doing on their computer.
> So yes: this email is explicitly meant to be also read the
Fedora list
> administrators.
There are addresses specifically for that purpose. It is very
frequently the case that list admins manage many lists they are not
subscribed to. If you have specific requests for the list admins, use
the -owner address.
.. no such -owner or similar addresses seem to be available in the
mail-headers sent to this list.
But think carefully about whether you need to do that. It's very
likely they'll just tell you what I just told you, and there's nothing
they can do. If you repeatedly get DSNs from the same domain, you can
send them to the list owner, and they might unsubscribe those
accounts. But that's up to them.
By now the list management - provided there is one - should know about
the problem. If they can't fix it I will by sending those DSNs to
/dev/null - or I just unsubscribe.
Thanks a lot for your time - goes out equally to everyone having
contributed to this thread.
Regards,
Wolfgang
3:08 p.m.
New subject: [Undeliverable: Re: Mailing lists and Discourse]
On Oct 30, 2022, at 15:57, Wolfgang Pfeiffer <roto(a)gmx.net> wrote:
On Sun, Oct 30, 2022 at 11:01:55PM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> > So yes: this email is explicitly meant to be also read the Fedora list
> > administrators.
>
> There are addresses specifically for that purpose. It is very
> frequently the case that list admins manage many lists they are not
> subscribed to. If you have specific requests for the list admins, use
> the -owner address.
.. no such -owner or similar addresses seem to be available in the
mail-headers sent to this list.
If you read the footer of every post to this list:
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
You will see a list guidance link.
Specifically read this:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines#Mailing_list
--
Jonathan Billings
4:28 p.m.
New subject: [Undeliverable: Re: Mailing lists and Discourse]
On Sun, Oct 30, 2022 at 04:08:00PM -0400, Jonathan Billings wrote:
On Oct 30, 2022, at 15:57, Wolfgang Pfeiffer <roto(a)gmx.net>
wrote:
>
> On Sun, Oct 30, 2022 at 11:01:55PM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>>
>> There are addresses specifically for that purpose. It is very
>> frequently the case that list admins manage many lists they are not
>> subscribed to. If you have specific requests for the list admins, use
>> the -owner address.
>
> .. no such -owner or similar addresses seem to be available in the
> mail-headers sent to this list.
If you read the footer of every post to this list:
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list -- users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
You will see a list guidance link.
Specifically read this:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines#Mailing_list
You're right, in the page above there is actually this address, slightly
hidden, but nevertheless, it's there:
users-owner(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
My mistake. I just searched email headers and footers going to this
list for an address like this. Where, sadly, it cannot be found.
Wolfgang
PS: I wrote a message to this thread that the problem is solved -
that's wrong: meantime the issue re-appeared.
And I already accidentally wrote an email reporting that this issue
still is not resolved into a new message - but sadly disconnected to
this thread, starting actually a new topic. Sorry about that.
12:48 p.m.
On Sun, Oct 30, 2022 at 08:57:28PM +0100, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote:
...snip...
By now the list management - provided there is one - should know about
the problem. If they can't fix it I will by sending those DSNs to
/dev/null - or I just unsubscribe.
Thanks a lot for your time - goes out equally to everyone having
contributed to this thread.
Just FYI, I looked into this and:
So, from what I can see, I think this is whats happening:
1. You send an email to the users list.
2. It goes to the lists.fedoraproject.org list server, is processed and
sends out to subscribers.
3. Some subscriber on the list (not 100% clear who) forwards their email
to yurelw(a)outlook.com
4. yurelw(a)outlook.com email is in turn forwarded to antoniowatson(a)gmail.com
5. gmail checks the SPF record of the email sender (you, thus gmx.net):
gmx.net descriptive text "v=spf1 ip4:213.165.64.0/23 ip4:74.208.5.64/26
ip4:212.227.126.128/25 ip4:212.227.15.0/25 ip4:212.227.17.0/27 ip4:74.208.4.192/26
ip4:82.165.159.0/24 ip4:217.72.207.0/27 ip4:82.165.229.31 ip4:82.165.230.21 -all"
Since outlook.com (which is sending the email) isn't in any of those IP
addresses, gmail.com rejects it.
I can try unsubscribing the email I _think_ is being forwarded to
the outlook.com user.
The list has mitigation for a similar case (DMARC).
It applies this to messages From: a domain publishing a DMARC policy of reject or
quarantine
So, if you could add such a policy/support to gmx.com it could use this
workaround (basically it replaces your sender address with the list
address).
kevin
6:18 p.m.
Kevin,
Thanks for your quick response!
TL;DR:
if you're suggesting that the
"From: Wolfgang Pfeiffer <roto(a)gmx.net>"
header in my future emails to this Fedora list should be replaced with
something along the line of this:
"From: Wolfgang Pfeiffer via <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org"
my answer is: yes - I'm fine with that.
On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 10:48:30AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Sun, Oct 30, 2022 at 08:57:28PM +0100, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote:
...snip...
>
> By now the list management - provided there is one - should know about
> the problem. If they can't fix it I will by sending those DSNs to
> /dev/null - or I just unsubscribe.
>
> Thanks a lot for your time - goes out equally to everyone having
> contributed to this thread.
Just FYI, I looked into this and:
So, from what I can see, I think this is whats happening:
1. You send an email to the users list.
[ ... ]
I can try unsubscribing the email I _think_ is being forwarded to
the outlook.com user.
Yes: one could try this: But the solution in the tl;dr from above might
end the troubles in one fell swoop anyways - so no further action
probably needed then; Provided I understood correctly, so far ..
The list has mitigation for a similar case (DMARC).
It applies this to messages From: a domain publishing a DMARC policy of reject or
quarantine
So, if you could add such a policy/support to gmx.com it could use this
workaround (basically it replaces your sender address with the list
address).
Again: Please see my tl;dr from above: is this what your suggesting in
this last part? If yes: as I said above: I'm fine with the address
replacement for this list and for my roto(a)gmx.net address ...
Thanks in anticipation!
Wolfgang
kevin
6:42 p.m.
On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 12:18:43AM +0100, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote:
Kevin,
Thanks for your quick response!
TL;DR:
if you're suggesting that the
"From: Wolfgang Pfeiffer <roto(a)gmx.net>"
header in my future emails to this Fedora list should be replaced with
something along the line of this:
"From: Wolfgang Pfeiffer via <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org"
my answer is: yes - I'm fine with that.
There's no way for me to force that to happen in the list software.
It will automatically do that if it detects you are using DMARC with a
policy of reject or quarantine, and not if it doesn't detect that. ;(
On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 10:48:30AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 30, 2022 at 08:57:28PM +0100, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote:
> ...snip...
> >
> > By now the list management - provided there is one - should know about
> > the problem. If they can't fix it I will by sending those DSNs to
> > /dev/null - or I just unsubscribe.
> >
> > Thanks a lot for your time - goes out equally to everyone having
> > contributed to this thread.
>
> Just FYI, I looked into this and:
>
> So, from what I can see, I think this is whats happening:
>
> 1. You send an email to the users list.
> [ ... ]
> I can try unsubscribing the email I _think_ is being forwarded to
> the outlook.com user.
Yes: one could try this: But the solution in the tl;dr from above might
end the troubles in one fell swoop anyways - so no further action
probably needed then; Provided I understood correctly, so far ..
I have already tried this, so I guess let me know when/if you get the
bounce. ;) (ie, I have unsubscribed the user who I think is forwarding
to outlook.com).
> The list has mitigation for a similar case (DMARC).
> It applies this to messages From: a domain publishing a DMARC policy of reject or
quarantine
> So, if you could add such a policy/support to gmx.com it could use this
> workaround (basically it replaces your sender address with the list
> address).
Again: Please see my tl;dr from above: is this what your suggesting in
this last part? If yes: as I said above: I'm fine with the address
replacement for this list and for my roto(a)gmx.net address ...
I can't force the list to do this. Your domain would need to enable
DMARC and set reject or quarantine for the list software to decide to
set this for you. ;( This needs a DNS entry added to your domain.
See https://dmarc.org/overview/
kevin
1:50 a.m.
Kevin Fenzi writes:
I can't force the list to do this. Your domain would need to
enable
DMARC and set reject or quarantine
Pretty sure it's not "his" domain. I believe GMX is a major internet
provider (and email provider) in Germany, which already has an
explicit DMARC policy of 'none' on gmx.net, and 'quarantine' on
subdomains. I suspect they've thought out their DMARC configuration
pretty carefully.
Does Fedora participate in the ARC protocol? I didn't see any ARC
fields for Fedora in the headers. Both of the sites he's reported
DSNs from (outlook and Google) do understand ARC, so that might help
(especially at Google, which is invoking From alignment even though
GMX publishes 'p=none'). No promises, of course, as both those
domains are well-known for thinking they know better than everyone
else.
Steve @ GNU Mailman FWIW
4:30 p.m.
On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 03:50:07PM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Kevin Fenzi writes:
> I can't force the list to do this. Your domain would need to enable
> DMARC and set reject or quarantine
Pretty sure it's not "his" domain. I believe GMX is a major internet
provider (and email provider) in Germany, which already has an
explicit DMARC policy of 'none' on gmx.net, and 'quarantine' on
subdomains. I suspect they've thought out their DMARC configuration
pretty carefully.
Perhaps so.
Does Fedora participate in the ARC protocol? I didn't see any
ARC
fields for Fedora in the headers. Both of the sites he's reported
DSNs from (outlook and Google) do understand ARC, so that might help
(especially at Google, which is invoking From alignment even though
GMX publishes 'p=none'). No promises, of course, as both those
domains are well-known for thinking they know better than everyone
else.
We don't currently have any ARC setup.
When / if we can get the list processor upgraded, I think newer versions
of mailman3 have native ARC support, and we could look at enabling that.
For now, no, there's no ARC support.
kevin
12:42 a.m.
On 11/1/22 5:30 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
We don't currently have any ARC setup.
When / if we can get the list processor upgraded, I think newer versions
of mailman3 have native ARC support, and we could look at enabling that.
I think so, yeah. 100% worth looking at when/if upgraded.
-srw
--
I use plain text email and bottom post: https://useplaintext.email
2:40 a.m.
Kevin Fenzi writes:
We don't currently have any ARC setup.
Well, I can't promise it will have great effect, although I know from
the design and implementation discussions that Google takes it
seriously, and Microsoft implements it. So it's just a suggestion for
"your copious free time".
When / if we can get the list processor upgraded, I think newer
versions
of mailman3 have native ARC support, and we could look at enabling
that.
We do, but it's not recommended, and definitely inferior to
implementation in the MTA unless the Mailman host is basically an
administrative domain to itself. I believe Fedora uses OpenDKIM, and
the same folks provide OpenARC at Https://Trusteddomainproject/Openarc.
8:05 a.m.
On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 04:42:14PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 12:18:43AM +0100, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote:
> Kevin,
> Thanks for your quick response!
> [ ... ]
I have already tried this, so I guess let me know when/if you get the
bounce. ;) (ie, I have unsubscribed the user who I think is forwarding
to outlook.com).
Good. Thanks! - After my last message to this list ("Nov 01, 2022 at
12:18:43AM +0100") I got no "Undeliverable" messages coming in to my
Inbox again. So far .. ;) .. I'll write back to you (not to the list)
if problems reappear ..
> > The list has mitigation for a similar case (DMARC).
> > It applies this to messages From: a domain publishing a DMARC policy of reject
or quarantine
> > So, if you could add such a policy/support to gmx.com it could use this
> > workaround (basically it replaces your sender address with the list
> > address).
>
> Again: Please see my tl;dr from above: is this what your suggesting in
> this last part? If yes: as I said above: I'm fine with the address
> replacement for this list and for my roto(a)gmx.net address ...
I can't force the list to do this. Your domain would need to enable
DMARC and set reject or quarantine for the list software to decide to
set this for you. ;(
As Stephen already wrote a few hours ago: gmx.net - I say: sadly -
isn't mine .. ;) .. it's a - I think German - email and I don't know
what else provider offering free and, I think, paid email services.
This needs a DNS entry added to your domain. See
https://dmarc.org/overview/
Thanks for this link - seems interesting: nice side-effect of this
"Undeliverable" messages problem is now that I might set up my own
email domain: I'm getting curious about this whole thing ... :) but on
the other hand: as long as gmx.net works here: why care .. :)
Thanks for your efforts, Kevin - goes out also to everyone else in
this thread.
Regards,
Wolfgang
kevin
11:19 a.m.
New subject: [Resolved] Re: Fwd: [Undeliverable: Re: Mailing lists and Discourse]
More than 24 hours ago I sent the message below to this list without
an error message as a follow-up being sent to me: Looks good, and I'd
guess the problem's solved.
Thanks a lot to everyone who helped fixing it. :)
Wolfgang
On Sat, Oct 29, 2022 at 03:01:52PM +0200, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote:
>On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 12:12:21PM +1030, Tim via users wrote:
>>On Thu, 2022-10-27 at 23:09 +0200, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote:
>>>2: Does anyone understand what happened according to the message
>>> attached below from postmaster(a)outlook.com
>>
>>[ ... ]
>>You''ll notice that my messages don't come from my address, but the
>>list server has changed them to:
>>
>>Tim via users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
>>
>>And I see the same for some other people.
>>
>>I think this is the list's approach to re-authoring certain addresses
>>to deal with dumb mail receivers. I don't have a problem with this, as
>>I don't want any private replies. And there are other approaches to
>>still enable private replies, such as I can see the list has CC'd me
>>(though I'm only getting one message, not two).
>
>I wouldn't have a problem with the list maintainers setting up a
>similiar procedure like in your case to deliver my emails to this
>list - if it solves the problem: great!
>
>So yes: this email is explicitly meant to be also read the Fedora list
>administrators.
>
>Wolfgang
535
days inactive
541
days old
26 comments
10 participants
participants (10)
-
George N. White III -
Jonathan Billings -
Kevin Fenzi -
Peter Boy -
Sam Varshavchik -
Samuel Sieb -
Slade Watkins -
Stephen J. Turnbull -
Tim -
Wolfgang Pfeiffer