|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 293 responses total. |
carson
|
|
response 187 of 293:
| 
Aug 21 04:06 UTC 2002 |
(wild. I just looked at some mail I have on Grex, and it *doesn't*
have a "From" line either.)
|
gelinas
|
|
response 188 of 293:
|
Aug 21 04:16 UTC 2002 |
No, that's not the line we were talking about, but if that is all there is,
it's interesting.
The "From " at the beginning of a line is part of th "mbox" format and is why
a similarly placed "from" in the text of a message is preceded by an angle
bracket: ">From this, we see . . ."
|
polytarp
|
|
response 189 of 293:
|
Aug 21 11:43 UTC 2002 |
joot:x:0:1:John Remmers' root:/a/r/e/remmers/joot:/bin/csh
That would appear to have a need-to-be-fixed-real-quick error.
|
davel
|
|
response 190 of 293:
|
Aug 21 12:43 UTC 2002 |
Eh? Looks fine to me. (Unless you're being a grammatical purist & saying
that it should be "Remmers's" instead of "Remmers'" - in which case I can only
say that that's not a "need-to-be-fixed-real-quick error".)
|
remmers
|
|
response 191 of 293:
|
Aug 21 13:19 UTC 2002 |
Guess it depends on which grammar books you believe. Note that
'zoot' apparently subscribes to the opposite philosophy.
|
polytarp
|
|
response 192 of 293:
|
Aug 21 13:22 UTC 2002 |
I'm just saying that you should fix it.
REAL QUICK
Thanks.
|
remmers
|
|
response 193 of 293:
|
Aug 21 13:43 UTC 2002 |
Nah.
|
jep
|
|
response 194 of 293:
|
Aug 21 17:21 UTC 2002 |
Backtalk is running exceedingly slowly right now. It took a few
minutes just to display this item, with it's 11 new responses.
|
dpc
|
|
response 195 of 293:
|
Aug 22 18:56 UTC 2002 |
Twice in the past week or so, e-mail to me from recycle.com
has been bounced by Grex. My correspondent sent me hard-
copy of the bounce message, which reads as follows:
The original message was received at Tue, 20 Augs 2002 16:47:07 -0400
(EDT) from [192.168.254.13}
----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
<dpc@cyberspace.org>
(reason: 553 <dpc@cyberspace.org>... One generation passeth away,
and anothergeneration cometh: but the earth abideth for ever."
----- Transcript of session follows -----
... while talking to grex.cyberspace.org.:
>>>RCPT To:<dpc@cyberspace.org>
<<< 553 <dpc@cyberspace.org>...One generation passeth away,
and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever.
550 5.1.1 <dpc@cyberspace.org>... User unknown
End of message. So what does *that* mean?
|
mdw
|
|
response 196 of 293:
|
Aug 22 20:43 UTC 2002 |
It means that the machine that tried to talk to grex is so badly
configured it looks exactly like either a mail flooder or a spammer to
grex. In fact, while these aren't things grex checked, the IP address
from which the last such failure "dpc@cyberspace.org>...One" came has no
reverse arpa ip-address to name DNS entry, and does not accept incoming
mail connections. The particular check that was tripped here is an
important one for grex; this was tripped more than 2100 times in the
past 4 1/2 days, and at least at a quick glance at the logs, most of
those failures probably are spammers.
The kindest thing is probably to suggest that your correspondent find
another mail system run by people who know what they're doing.
Alternatively, you might ask your correspondent to ask his postmaster to
familiarize himself with RFC 2821, and especially section 3.6, and to
check his mail system with compliance to that section.
|
gull
|
|
response 197 of 293:
|
Aug 22 21:00 UTC 2002 |
By the way, I finally figured out why replies I sent to a mailing list
I'm on kept tripping off the spam filters. It turns out this mailing
list's software likes to insert spaces into Subject lines to make them
wrap prettily. Subject lines with lots of spaces seem to be one of the
things Grex filters on.
|
carson
|
|
response 198 of 293:
|
Aug 22 21:05 UTC 2002 |
(so does SpamAssassin, FWIW.)
|
mdw
|
|
response 199 of 293:
|
Aug 22 21:41 UTC 2002 |
What mailing list software was this?
|
gull
|
|
response 200 of 293:
|
Aug 23 12:57 UTC 2002 |
LISTSERV 1.8d
|
dpc
|
|
response 201 of 293:
|
Aug 23 20:42 UTC 2002 |
Thanx for the help on both the "cornerhealth.org" problem and
the "recycle.com" problem, folks. The answers make sense,
even to someone technologically-challenged like me!
|
tod
|
|
response 202 of 293:
|
Aug 23 20:49 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
carson
|
|
response 203 of 293:
|
Aug 23 21:05 UTC 2002 |
(I see that error often. it only seems to be a problem when I try to ssh
from here.)
|
russ
|
|
response 204 of 293:
|
Aug 23 21:12 UTC 2002 |
Just a note here... I'd say that spouting a meaningless Bible verse
instead of a descriptive message is very unfriendly to legitimate
but mis-configured mail senders. A spammer isn't going to try to
fix things (Grex isn't important enough), but the lack of information
means that a legitimate sender *can't* fix things (especially if they
have no alternative channel to get information about the real cause
of the bounce, or no time to pursue it).
|
rksjr
|
|
response 205 of 293:
|
Aug 23 22:44 UTC 2002 |
Re #180 through #188: (This posting is intended to be
posting #205.) Regarding my not seeing any "You have new
mail." notices when there was new mail in my inbox, I am
able to observe the "You have mail." notice in only three
locations:
(i.) the motd/log-in screen,
(ii.) the Lynx home page screen, and
(iii.) the bbs/PicoSpan introductory screen
(as well as an unread/no unread mail notice in my plan).
Within the last three days I have discovered (via sending
test e-mails to myself) that:
(i.) merely entering the Pine "Main Menu" (without
checking the inbox) turns-off the "You have new mail."
notice in both the motd/log-in screen and the Lynx home page
screen, i.e. it changes a "You have new mail." notice to a
"You have mail." notice. (I had incorrectedly assumed that
it would not.)
(ii.) receiving new mail in my inbox does not change the
"You have mail." notice in the bbs/PicoSpan introductory
screen into a "You have new mail." notice. (I had
incorrectedly assumed that it would.)
Therefore, my tentative hypothesis as to why I was not
seeing any "You have new mail." notices (and incorrectly
relying on their absence) when there was new mail in my
inbox is as follows.
I had entered the Pine "Main Menu" (to access the compose
option), which turned-off the "You have new mail." notice in
the motd/log-in screen and the Lynx home page screen, and I
had been relying on the bbs/PicoSpan introductory screen
notice as well, thus generating my incorrect assumption that
I did not have new mail.
On Sunday the 18th (when more mail arrived, this time from
outside the Grex system) a "You have new mail." notice
appeared in the motd/log-in screen, on which occasion I
discovered the mail that had probably been in my inbox since
Wednesday the 14th, through five loggings-in.
Having perused relevant portions of items 105 and 295 in
the Information conference regarding defining mailmsg in my
.cfonce files and establishing "a call to 'newmail' in my
.login file", I am making progress toward solving the
aforementioned noticing deficiency in my configuration.
Does anyone know why the default setting of the "You have
mail." notice in the bbs/PicoSpan introductory screen is
such that it is unaffected by the arrival of new mail in the
user's inbox?
|
polytarp
|
|
response 206 of 293:
|
Aug 23 23:18 UTC 2002 |
I still noticed the same problem. I really wish someone would fix that.
I might cry.
|
russ
|
|
response 207 of 293:
|
Aug 25 02:13 UTC 2002 |
I suggest that the spam problem could be partially addressed by
deleting every e-mail whose main part has a "Content-transfer-encoding"
of base64. This appears to be used exclusively to get around filters.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 208 of 293:
|
Aug 25 21:06 UTC 2002 |
It is also used for MS-Word documents, which some people send to me for
quite legitimate reasons, even if I am not inclined to jump through the
necessary hoops to actually read such documents.
I might *want* to count such things "spam", but they are not.
|
russ
|
|
response 209 of 293:
|
Aug 26 10:49 UTC 2002 |
Re #208: Sometimes you can tell the difference between "multipart/mixed"
and a binary-encoded body just from the header. That wouldn't have
worked on the spam I just got, but you could scan the body and see if
there is a plain-text or HTML section, or not.
If the main part of the mail is encoded as base64, rather than one or
more of the *attachments*, you'd never know what the recipient was
trying to send you anyway; all you'd have is the Subject: line.
|
gull
|
|
response 210 of 293:
|
Aug 26 12:51 UTC 2002 |
Doesn't just about every MIME-encoded binary file get encoded as base64?
|
davel
|
|
response 211 of 293:
|
Aug 26 13:00 UTC 2002 |
I think Russ's point was that those are included as attachments, with
filenames, rather than as the body of the message in base64 with no filename.
I don't know whether he's right that the latter are always spam, but that's
certainly been my experience. But then again, I rarely am getting binary
files in email other than spam.
|
