* If you don't want Email, please just say so!
@ 2006-03-01 18:10 Alan Mackenzie
2006-03-03 18:58 ` Andreas Schwab
` (3 more replies)
0 siblings, 4 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Alan Mackenzie @ 2006-03-01 18:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
Hi, Emacs!
In recent days, several emails I've sent to Emacs hackers' personal
mailboxes have been bounced, with messages like:
to=<hacker@domain.foo>, delay=2+02:26:53, xdelay=00:00:22, mailer=esmtp,
relay=xxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxxx.net. [128.128.128.128], stat=Deferred: 451 4.7.1
Please try one more time in one hour to confirm.
This particular message I'd already tried to send yesterday, at least
once. I'm tempted to just discard it.
I'm feeling messed around by this at the moment. It seems that this
hacker's mailbox will bounce my mail unless I resend it within 1 hour +
epsilon, for some unknown (but inadequate) epsilon.
I detest this "greylisting" which seems to be proliferating through the
community. Am I supposed to get down on my knees and lick somebody's
boots, just to be allowed to send him email?
I know my mail configuration (using sendmail -q over a modem connection)
is anything but up to date. I keep meaning to get around to getting a
DSL connection in, which I'll manage some day. I also know how revolting
it is to get deluged by spam (hey, I get it too). But I have to pay
telephone bills by the minute. Each time somebody bounces my mail with
"try again later, luser!" it costs me cents, which steadily accumulate
into Euros.
Please be reasonable, friends! Surely if you're going to say "try again
in an hour!" (or even 5 minutes), you can configure your systems to
accept it, say, up to two days later. Please? That way my costs will
only be doubled.
(And if anybody gets the same hassle sending mail to me, please tell me
so that I can complain to my ISP.)
--
Alan Mackenzie (Munich, Germany)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: If you don't want Email, please just say so!
2006-03-01 18:10 If you don't want Email, please just say so! Alan Mackenzie
@ 2006-03-03 18:58 ` Andreas Schwab
2006-03-04 0:03 ` Giorgos Keramidas
2006-03-03 21:43 ` Eli Zaretskii
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Andreas Schwab @ 2006-03-03 18:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: emacs-devel
Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> writes:
> In recent days, several emails I've sent to Emacs hackers' personal
> mailboxes have been bounced, with messages like:
Why are you complaining to emacs-devel@ instead of the postmaster of the
affected domain?
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
SuSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
PGP key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: If you don't want Email, please just say so!
2006-03-01 18:10 If you don't want Email, please just say so! Alan Mackenzie
2006-03-03 18:58 ` Andreas Schwab
@ 2006-03-03 21:43 ` Eli Zaretskii
2006-03-04 11:18 ` Ken Raeburn
2006-03-04 13:38 ` Richard Stallman
3 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2006-03-03 21:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: emacs-devel
> Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 18:10:08 +0000 (GMT)
> From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>
>
> In recent days, several emails I've sent to Emacs hackers' personal
> mailboxes have been bounced, with messages like:
>
> to=<hacker@domain.foo>, delay=2+02:26:53, xdelay=00:00:22, mailer=esmtp,
> relay=xxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxxx.net. [128.128.128.128], stat=Deferred: 451 4.7.1
> Please try one more time in one hour to confirm.
> [...]
> I detest this "greylisting" which seems to be proliferating through the
> community. Am I supposed to get down on my knees and lick somebody's
> boots, just to be allowed to send him email?
> [...]
> Please be reasonable, friends!
Please be patient: mailman seems to be in deep trouble lately, so all
kind of weird stuff can happen (I know I've seen some of that). I'm
sure it's being worked on.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: If you don't want Email, please just say so!
2006-03-03 18:58 ` Andreas Schwab
@ 2006-03-04 0:03 ` Giorgos Keramidas
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Giorgos Keramidas @ 2006-03-04 0:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: Alan Mackenzie, emacs-devel
On 2006-03-03 19:58, Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de> wrote:
> Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> writes:
> > In recent days, several emails I've sent to Emacs hackers' personal
> > mailboxes have been bounced, with messages like:
>
> Why are you complaining to emacs-devel@ instead of the postmaster of the
> affected domain?
Because mailing the personal accounts of Emacs developers is very likely
to bounce again with the same greylist warning, and since they are Emacs
hackers they are very likely to get messages from the list, I guess...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: If you don't want Email, please just say so!
2006-03-01 18:10 If you don't want Email, please just say so! Alan Mackenzie
2006-03-03 18:58 ` Andreas Schwab
2006-03-03 21:43 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2006-03-04 11:18 ` Ken Raeburn
2006-03-04 15:38 ` Giorgos Keramidas
2006-03-04 13:38 ` Richard Stallman
3 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Ken Raeburn @ 2006-03-04 11:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: emacs-devel
On Mar 1, 2006, at 13:10, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> This particular message I'd already tried to send yesterday, at least
> once. I'm tempted to just discard it.
If it is greylisting, generally it also does matching on the sending
IP address, so if you're getting dynamically assigned addresses when
dialing up, it's going to hurt you. Though, I think many greylisting
sites do use much shorter block times -- I think mine is only 4 or 5
minutes.
> I detest this "greylisting" which seems to be proliferating through
> the
> community. Am I supposed to get down on my knees and lick somebody's
> boots, just to be allowed to send him email?
There's a lot of experimentation in spam fighting; it's an evolving
process. Greylisting is one of the techniques I like, since it (a)
can provide a meaningful message back to the SMTP sender in the rare
case of a false positive, and (b) won't generate bogus mail in joe-
job cases. For most mail configurations that actually comply with
the specs, it's transparent except for a delay in limited cases.
(This isn't the place for diving into details, but it sounds like
you've run across a description anyways.) In fact, I wish the FSF
would provide greylisting on their mail servers, at least as an
option; the spam I get through my @gnu.org forwarding address is much
more than the directly-delivered spam I get at home. (I think the
spam I get through FSF mailing lists may *also* be more than the
direct-delivered spam.)
Your kind of setup, which tends to get hurt by greylisting
techniques, is, as far as I can tell, very uncommon these days. I'm
not on any of the mailing lists where lots of sysadmins hang out, but
I think yours may be the first case I've heard of with delivery
problems from a site actually compliant with the RFCs (i.e., trying
to resend, rather than throwing away any email not immediately
deliverable).
> I know my mail configuration (using sendmail -q over a modem
> connection)
> is anything but up to date. I keep meaning to get around to getting a
> DSL connection in, which I'll manage some day. I also know how
> revolting
> it is to get deluged by spam (hey, I get it too). But I have to pay
> telephone bills by the minute. Each time somebody bounces my mail
> with
> "try again later, luser!" it costs me cents, which steadily accumulate
> into Euros.
Some ISPs will provide outgoing mail relays for you; does yours not
do this? If not, perhaps you can find some friendly site which will
let you relay outgoing mail through them, with some kind of
authentication (certificate-based, maybe) so they don't have to act
as open relays to do so. Either with normal SMTP, or RFC 2476-style
message submission. (I'd offer, if I were set up for message
submission and certificate authentication, and if I had more than one
mail system, to provide more reliability.)
> Please be reasonable, friends! Surely if you're going to say "try
> again
> in an hour!" (or even 5 minutes), you can configure your systems to
> accept it, say, up to two days later. Please? That way my costs will
> only be doubled.
Yeah, I think that usually can be tuned, too (ooh, and mine was kind
of on the short side -- now fixed), but like I said above, it's
probably a changing IP address that's going to hurt you. Most ISPs
and companies will have a relatively small set of outgoing mail
servers, or fixed addresses if internal systems send outgoing mail
directly, so it usually doesn't hurt. But then there are a handful
like you that don't fit that description...
(Of course, I could be guessing wrong, and you've got a static IP
address, and it's just some site with badly tuned greylisting
parameters that's causing problems for you. But it still sounds like
a friendly outgoing relay would help a lot.)
Ken
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: If you don't want Email, please just say so!
2006-03-01 18:10 If you don't want Email, please just say so! Alan Mackenzie
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2006-03-04 11:18 ` Ken Raeburn
@ 2006-03-04 13:38 ` Richard Stallman
3 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Richard Stallman @ 2006-03-04 13:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: emacs-devel
In recent days, several emails I've sent to Emacs hackers' personal
mailboxes have been bounced, with messages like:
to=<hacker@domain.foo>, delay=2+02:26:53, xdelay=00:00:22, mailer=esmtp,
relay=xxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxxx.net. [128.128.128.128], stat=Deferred: 451 4.7.1
Please try one more time in one hour to confirm.
I don't know anything about this--I have never seen it.
If you were to tell us some specific email addresses where
this occurs, we might be able to figure out something,
either by deduction or by asking them.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: If you don't want Email, please just say so!
2006-03-04 11:18 ` Ken Raeburn
@ 2006-03-04 15:38 ` Giorgos Keramidas
2006-03-04 18:34 ` Ken Raeburn
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Giorgos Keramidas @ 2006-03-04 15:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: Alan Mackenzie, emacs-devel
Referring to the email setup of Alan Mackenzie, who sends email
in batches with `sendmail -q'':
On 2006-03-04 06:18, Ken Raeburn <raeburn@gnu.org> wrote:
>
> Your kind of setup, which tends to get hurt by greylisting
> techniques, is, as far as I can tell, very uncommon these days.
This depends on which part of the world one lives in, I'm afraid.
In my region, where fast DSL connections and static IP addresses
are charged huge amounts of money, it's not very uncommon to send
email over a dialup line with ``sendmail -q''.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: If you don't want Email, please just say so!
2006-03-04 15:38 ` Giorgos Keramidas
@ 2006-03-04 18:34 ` Ken Raeburn
2006-03-04 21:38 ` Nick Roberts
2006-03-05 0:37 ` Giorgos Keramidas
0 siblings, 2 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Ken Raeburn @ 2006-03-04 18:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: Alan Mackenzie, emacs-devel
On Mar 4, 2006, at 10:38, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> In my region, where fast DSL connections and static IP addresses
> are charged huge amounts of money, it's not very uncommon to send
> email over a dialup line with ``sendmail -q''.
And no ISP-provided outgoing-mail server?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: If you don't want Email, please just say so!
2006-03-04 18:34 ` Ken Raeburn
@ 2006-03-04 21:38 ` Nick Roberts
2006-03-05 0:37 ` Giorgos Keramidas
1 sibling, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Nick Roberts @ 2006-03-04 21:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: Giorgos Keramidas, Alan Mackenzie, emacs-devel
Ken Raeburn writes:
> On Mar 4, 2006, at 10:38, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> > In my region, where fast DSL connections and static IP addresses
> > are charged huge amounts of money, it's not very uncommon to send
> > email over a dialup line with ``sendmail -q''.
>
> And no ISP-provided outgoing-mail server?
Yes, at one time at one timeI had that problem. In my case, adding:
relayhost = smtp.snap.net.nz
to main.cf (using Postfix) solved it, as smtp.snap.net.nz has a recognised IP
address whereas my dynamically allocated one didn't.
--
Nick http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: If you don't want Email, please just say so!
2006-03-04 18:34 ` Ken Raeburn
2006-03-04 21:38 ` Nick Roberts
@ 2006-03-05 0:37 ` Giorgos Keramidas
1 sibling, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Giorgos Keramidas @ 2006-03-05 0:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: Alan Mackenzie, emacs-devel
On 2006-03-04 13:34, Ken Raeburn <raeburn@gnu.org> wrote:
>On Mar 4, 2006, at 10:38, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
>> In my region, where fast DSL connections and static IP addresses
>> are charged huge amounts of money, it's not very uncommon to send
>> email over a dialup line with ``sendmail -q''.
>
> And no ISP-provided outgoing-mail server?
Yes, there is an ISP provided outgoing-mail server. I don't see how
this makes re-posting easier, but I don't care about having a long
argument about the relative merits of greylisting or not. I was just
implying that some times re-sending messages may not be as easy as it
sounds.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2006-03-05 0:37 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2006-03-01 18:10 If you don't want Email, please just say so! Alan Mackenzie
2006-03-03 18:58 ` Andreas Schwab
2006-03-04 0:03 ` Giorgos Keramidas
2006-03-03 21:43 ` Eli Zaretskii
2006-03-04 11:18 ` Ken Raeburn
2006-03-04 15:38 ` Giorgos Keramidas
2006-03-04 18:34 ` Ken Raeburn
2006-03-04 21:38 ` Nick Roberts
2006-03-05 0:37 ` Giorgos Keramidas
2006-03-04 13:38 ` Richard Stallman
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this external index
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.