Re: bouncing listserv email...
Kevin Bishop [at netvigator.com] wrote:
> Thanks for your e-mail.
> The bounce-back is designed to notify the sender that the recipient
> cannot be reached. I sympathise with your situation, but the fact
> that your list server chooses to rebroadcast this message to the
> entire list is surely not our responsibility. However, I've passed on
> your comments to our Customer Services and they tell me they will
> look into the possibility of incorporating the user's identity into
> the bounce-back message contents. Meanwhile you might consider
> deleting all @my.netvigator.com accounts from your list.
whoops. maybe i didn't give you enough info.
your bounces are NOT going back to the list server, where they
should be: instead, they are being sent directly to the poster.
i'm CC:ing the debian-user list on this; i'll get a bounce directly
from your server when i post it. i've got a forwarding rule installed
in my .procmailrc file that'll beam it straight to you so you can
confirm whether or not i know what i'm saying. (many of us have
crafted such filters to send them directly to /dev/null, which
should be unnecessary.)
(you're right -- if the list server was poorly configured and did
re-broadcast EVERY bounced message to ALL subscribers,
pandemonium would soon be upon us! someone would get lynched!)
i've seen debian-users list members discuss the possibility of
deleting all netvigator.com users from the debian-user list,
but we agree that it's rather rude to penalize all potential
netvigator subscribers just because one is on vacation (or has
perhaps passed beyond the veil). plus, i'm just a lowly peon,
and don't have access to that kind of 'delete power' anyhow. :)
i do appreciate you writing me back; we've been developing low
expectations based on past experiences with other inept organizations;
glad to see that you're at least willing to broach the subject.
again, please tell your webmasters that the messages are bouncing
NOT to the list-server as it should, but to the original poster.
as if your software is replying/bouncing directly to what your
system sees in the 'From' field.
that is, each of us gets our own message re-sent from the list server
(by means of public broadcast and for ease in tracking threads)
and ALSO a direct bounce of that message from your my.netvigator.com
if it helps, here are the sample headers in a typical debian-user message
that's broadcast from the server:
-From firstname.lastname@example.org Mon Sep 25 03:07:56 2000
-Delivery-date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 03:07:56 -0500
-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] ident=will)
- by server with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
- id 13dTIq-0003cS-00
- for <will@localhost>; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 03:07:56 -0500
-Received: from mail.speedex.net
- by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.3.3)
- for will@localhost (single-drop);
- Mon, 25 Sep 2000 03:07:56 -0500 -(CDT)
-Received: from murphy.debian.org (murphy.debian.org [188.8.131.52])
- by mail.speedex.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id DAA12202
- for <email@example.com>; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 03:05:27 -0500 (CDT)
-Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 03:05:27 -0500 (CDT)
-Received: (qmail 4230 invoked by uid 38); 25 Sep 2000 07:54:39 -0000
-Received: (qmail 4118 invoked from network); 25 Sep 2000 07:54:38 -0000
-Received: from client-sp03-85.speedex.net (HELO server) (firstname.lastname@example.org)
- by murphy.debian.org with SMTP; 25 Sep 2000 07:54:38 -0000
-Received: from will by server with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
- id 13dT99-0003bb-00
- for <email@example.com>; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 02:57:55 -0500
-Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 02:57:55 -0500
-From: will trillich <firstname.lastname@example.org>
-Subject: Re: Procmail filtering / UNDELIVERABLE EMAIL
- <20000924153729.A770@bodach.com> <20000924175712.Y18152@storm.ca>
-Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
- from email@example.com on Sun, Sep 24, 2000 at 05:57:12PM -0400
-X-Mailing-List: <firstname.lastname@example.org> archive/latest/109616
if you can help us out, we'd all* appreciate it.
*no doubt some of us (the debian-user list has a large enough population,
almost anything is possible) have bizarre senses of humor and might not
appricate having this fixed, but i think the majoriy of us would like
see the incoming messages from netvigator.com cease.
without having to penalize your other netvigator users in the process.