From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: bob@proulx.com (Bob Proulx) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: OP mail delayed? Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 10:58:39 -0600 Message-ID: <20080613165839.GA27755@dementia.proulx.com> References: <001f01c8ca7b$b410fee0$c2b22382@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1213387941 9341 80.91.229.12 (13 Jun 2008 20:12:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 20:12:21 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jun 13 22:13:04 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1K7Fdp-00017Q-Sa for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 22:12:58 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51313 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1K7Fd1-0001qf-On for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 16:12:07 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1K7Cbs-0004di-VE for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 12:58:45 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1K7Cbs-0004dV-Ab for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 12:58:44 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=35071 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1K7Cbs-0004dS-6J for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 12:58:44 -0400 Original-Received: from joseki.proulx.com ([216.17.153.58]:56864) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1K7Cbq-0003S5-NG for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 12:58:43 -0400 Original-Received: from dementia.proulx.com (dementia.proulx.com [192.168.1.115]) by joseki.proulx.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 198E6FADF for ; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 10:58:40 -0600 (MDT) Original-Received: by dementia.proulx.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E7EF13CC509; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 10:58:39 -0600 (MDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <001f01c8ca7b$b410fee0$c2b22382@us.oracle.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 16:11:46 -0400 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:54802 Archived-At: I am not a subscriber of help-gnu-emacs. Please CC me on replies. I am one of the listhelpers that tries to keep spam off of the mailing lists and do other list maintenance. I happened to see this discussion about delayed email delivery and wanted to say a few words about it. Drew Adams wrote: > . Others are seeing the same thing. There are several reasons this might occur. One is when there are several discussion groups for help-gnu-emacs. I don't know about help-gnu-emacs in particular but some mailing lists are gatewayed between an email mailing list and a usenet news group. Personally I think that is a bad idea because the mailing list and the newsgroup have a different set of posting rules. But in that case an OP who is not subscribed nor whitelisted may post a message to the newsgroup. Another person who is subscribed or whitelisted in the mailing list might see a newsgroup posting from a new address and respond to it on the newsgroup. Then both messages are gatewayed to the mailing list. Because the responder is known to the mailing list it is passed through without delay. Because the OP is unknown to the mailing list the message must be approved by a human until the address proves itself not to be a spammer and becomes known. One of the problems of gateways are that a spammer posts spam to the newsgroup and everyone on the news group will see it. People then sometimes respond to the spam. When the messages are gatewayed to the mailing list the spam filtering will discard the original spam message. Mailing list readers won't see the spam. But responses to the spam message by whitelisted posters are not discarded and therefore readers of the mailing list will see spam coming from the newsgroup by way of newsgroup responses but will never have seen the original spam. Because of the newsgroup response it can pull spam through from the newsgroup onto the mailing list. If spam is cancelled from the newsgroup later this can't cancel the spam message already delivered to the mailing list. > . This just started happening - it didn't happen before. If this really just started happening then this probably isn't a mailing list to news gateway issue. Unless a new newsgroup has popped up recently most of these have been pretty stable for a long time (years) and you would have been seeing this all along. Therefore recent behavior changes would probably indicate something on the client end of the email delivery. > . I don't see this in other GNU Emacs mailing lists. All of the lists.gnu.org mailing lists are handled similarly. Therefore once again this points to something on the client delivery end. > What is the difference between a message with RE coming from the list and a > message without RE? Wouldn't they both be treated the same by a spam > filter? Why would the latter (the OP) be delayed more than the > former? Messages from addresses unknown to the system, not subscribed and not whitelisted, are held for approval until one of the human listhelpers can review the message and send it on its way. The address is added to the subscription whitelist and subsequent messages are passed through without delay. This step is needed because spammers are now routinely attacking lists.gnu.org by subscribing and then posting spam from subscribed addresses. On your client system if greylisting is implemented (possibly incorrectly) then your client system will reject temporarily based upon configured parameters of host system and email addresses in the sender and recipient fields. Normally the mailing list would generate enough continuous traffic that the lists.gnu.org host machine would be in the known okay host list all of the time and mail from it would never be delayed. But it is possible that an overly agressive program may be written that looks at the original sender and delay mail based upon the sender address and not the sending host. This would delay OP mail from new addresses from the mailing list but would send directly through response mail from frequent responders. This would cause exactly the situation that you describe. I use greylisting myself and the well known greylisting daemons behave reasonably by default in this regard and should not create this problem. But I think an incorrectly constructed process could easily create this problem. If your email delivery has recently gotten more agressive at spam filtering then something along these lines may be occurring. And of course the problem you are seeing might be for any one of a number of other reasons too. > This is not about messages sent directly to me from someone. It is about > messages that come from this list. If you contact me off-list with message-ids of messages that fall into this catagory I can chase down more details. Bob