From pyz at brama.com  Sat Dec  1 15:06:42 2012
From: pyz at brama.com (Max Pyziur)
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2012 09:06:42 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Global vs list-specific settings
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.02.1212010904010.16614@brama.com>


Greetings,

I'm writing to verify the setting of send_reminders.

For some of my disabled lists I have send_reminders yet today (the 1st of 
the month) I see notifications being sent out.

I checked the setting for mailman, mailman's superuser, and see that 
send_reminders is set to 'Yes'

Does the mailman send_reminders setting override individual lists' 
send_reminders settings.

It seems that it does, but I am writing to verify this.

Much thanks,

Max Pyziur
pyz at brama.com

From mark at msapiro.net  Sat Dec  1 17:59:16 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2012 08:59:16 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Global vs list-specific settings
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.2.02.1212010904010.16614@brama.com>
Message-ID: <PC1993201212010859160500e0018804@MSAPIRO>

Max Pyziur wrote:

>Does the mailman send_reminders setting override individual lists' 
>send_reminders settings.


No. The setting for send_reminders on the site (mailman) list affects
only that list. Here are the rules:

1) The sending of periodic (monthly) reminders is done by Mailman's
cron/mailpasswds. If this job is not being run by cron, no reminders
will be sent.

2) If cron/mailpasswds is run, reminders will be sent for those lists
for which send_reminders is Yes. If send_reminders is No, no reminders
will be sent for that list.

3) For lists with send_reminders = Yes, users can individually opt out
of reminders by setting their own "Get password reminder email for
this list?" option to No. The converse is not true. I.e. setting this
option to Yes will not cause a periodic reminder for this list to be
sent to this user if the list's send_reminders = No.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From karsten.becker at ecologic.eu  Sun Dec  2 16:50:14 2012
From: karsten.becker at ecologic.eu (Karsten Becker)
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2012 16:50:14 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman needs 20 seconds to complete per email
In-Reply-To: <CA+XidOFtkSjCgw_M5eApivmxXcU6x3mPOV5-CiVPUQkFQ0ywiw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <50B4B7B9.7050303@ecologic.eu>
	<PC19932012112713420101872d0be6bc@MSAPIRO>
	<20121127215641.GC7365@charite.de>
	<CA+XidOFtkSjCgw_M5eApivmxXcU6x3mPOV5-CiVPUQkFQ0ywiw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <50BB78B6.7090206@ecologic.eu>

Hi,

thanks for your answers. Maybe I have misunderstood the architecture.

What I can see in the mail.log is, that the incoming email towards a
mailing list gets transported nearby "at once" from Postfix to Mailman.
Then I see nothing in the Mailman logs for 20 seconds. Then Mailman
prints out these message shown below and nearby "at once" I see the
email in mail.log going out via Postfix.

So, how/why could a Postfix configuration setting be the cause...?
Postfix, as far as I can see it in mail.log, is handling the email fast
as hell.

This question is definitely not for ranting - I'm just trying to
understand correctly how everything works together to find the
"brake"...  ;-)

It the meantime I have opened a dedicated port for Mailman at my Postfix
for re-injection, without a second unneeded round through Amavis & Co. -
but this didn't help either.

Regards
Karsten

On 11/27/2012 11:02 PM, Ben Cooksley wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt
> <Ralf.Hildebrandt at charite.de> wrote:
>> * Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>:
>>
>>>>> Nov 27 08:00:22 2012 (10393) <mailman.0.1353999601.22399.carbonmarkets at lists.mycompany.eu> smtp to carbonmarkets for 1 recips, completed in 21.021 seconds
>>>>> Nov 27 08:00:43 2012 (10393) <mailman.1.1353999601.22399.agriculture at lists.mycompany.eu> smtp to agriculture for 1 recips, completed in 21.013 seconds
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>
>>> It is extreme and highly unusual for a single Mailman-Postfix SMTP
>>> transaction to take 20 seconds, but it is almost certainly due to
>>> something in your Postfix configuration.
>>
>> It's probably some DNS resolution issue (I'd say). Or a really slow
>> smtpd_proxy_filter.
> 
> It could also be a sleep command, in one of the various
> smtpd_client_restrictions rules.
> Usually one puts permit_mynetworks (which contains
> localhost/127.0.0.1) before those though.
> 
>>
>> --
>> Ralf Hildebrandt                   Charite Universit?tsmedizin Berlin
>> ralf.hildebrandt at charite.de        Campus Benjamin Franklin
>> http://www.charite.de              Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin
>> Gesch?ftsbereich IT, Abt. Netzwerk fon: +49-30-450.570.155
>> ------------------------------------------------------
>> Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users at python.org
>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
>> Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
>> Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
>> Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/bcooksley%40kde.org
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
> Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
> Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
> Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
> Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/karsten.becker%40ecologic.eu
> 


From mark at msapiro.net  Sun Dec  2 21:27:43 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2012 12:27:43 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman needs 20 seconds to complete per email
In-Reply-To: <50BB78B6.7090206@ecologic.eu>
Message-ID: <PC1993201212021227430328d2eb2b73@MSAPIRO>

Karsten Becker wrote:
>
>What I can see in the mail.log is, that the incoming email towards a
>mailing list gets transported nearby "at once" from Postfix to Mailman.
>Then I see nothing in the Mailman logs for 20 seconds. Then Mailman
>prints out these message shown below and nearby "at once" I see the
>email in mail.log going out via Postfix.


But if you look at the whole log, you'll see that the connect from
Mailman to Postfix to deliver that message occurred 20 seconds earlier.


>So, how/why could a Postfix configuration setting be the cause...?
>Postfix, as far as I can see it in mail.log, is handling the email fast
>as hell.


Postfix is acknowledging the end of DATA, writing a log entry and
delivering the outgoing mail. The whole transaction is:

Connect
HELO
MAIL FROM
RCPT TO
...
RCPT TO
DATA
(message data)
.

Somewhere in that transaction, Postfix is taking a long time to respond.

If you need more detailed logging to figure it out, see the last
paragraph of my reply at
<http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/2012-November/074439.html>.


>This question is definitely not for ranting - I'm just trying to
>understand correctly how everything works together to find the
>"brake"...  ;-)


Postfix delivers the mail to Mailman. It is immediately queued in
Miailman's in/ queue for IncomingRunner. IncomingRunner wakes up
within 1 second and processes the message through the pipeline of
Handlers. If there are no errors, nothing is logged. The ToArchive
handler queues the message in the archive/ queue for ArchRunner and
the ToOutgoing handler queues the message in the out/ queue for
OutgoingRunner.

If the message is a post and it is archived, you will see it in the
list's archive within 2 seconds (maximum sleep time in IncomingRunner
and ArchRunner) of Postfix delivering it to Mailman.

Likewise, within the same 2 seconds, OutgoingRunner will pick up the
message and begin processing it. When done, it will write the post and
smtp log entries. In the smtp log entries, the 21+ second processing
time is the time in OutgoingRunner. All OutgoingRunner is doing is
SMTP to the outgoing MTA (host and port set by SMTPHOST, default =
'localhost', and SMTPPORT default = 0, SMTPPORT = 0 implies port 25).
It is that SMTP transaction that is taking 21 seconds because of some
configuration or other issue in the outgoing MTA.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From lstone19 at stonejongleux.com  Sun Dec  2 22:52:41 2012
From: lstone19 at stonejongleux.com (Larry Stone)
Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2012 15:52:41 -0600
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman needs 20 seconds to complete per email
In-Reply-To: <PC1993201212021227430328d2eb2b73@MSAPIRO>
References: <PC1993201212021227430328d2eb2b73@MSAPIRO>
Message-ID: <90F5F952-4647-48D8-852A-348D7ECACA2B@stonejongleux.com>

On Dec 2, 2012, at 2:27 PM, Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net> wrote:

> Likewise, within the same 2 seconds, OutgoingRunner will pick up the
> message and begin processing it. When done, it will write the post and
> smtp log entries. In the smtp log entries, the 21+ second processing
> time is the time in OutgoingRunner. All OutgoingRunner is doing is
> SMTP to the outgoing MTA (host and port set by SMTPHOST, default =
> 'localhost', and SMTPPORT default = 0, SMTPPORT = 0 implies port 25).
> It is that SMTP transaction that is taking 21 seconds because of some
> configuration or other issue in the outgoing MTA.


A stab in the dark but it sounds like you might have postscreen (part of Postfix) or some other service on port 25 that is causing the delay.

In this day and age, port 25 really should be used only for mail coming from outside destined for your server. I'd suggest creating another incoming Postfix port (e.g. 20025) that is exclusively for mail from Mailman being injected to Postfix. Configure it appropriately so that only lcoalhost or whatever other local hosts need it can use it.

-- 
Larry Stone
lstone19 at stonejongleux.com
http://www.stonejongleux.com/




From cite at incertum.net  Mon Dec  3 07:16:37 2012
From: cite at incertum.net (Stefan Foerster)
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 07:16:37 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman needs 20 seconds to complete per email
In-Reply-To: <50BB78B6.7090206@ecologic.eu>
References: <50B4B7B9.7050303@ecologic.eu>
	<PC19932012112713420101872d0be6bc@MSAPIRO>
	<20121127215641.GC7365@charite.de>
	<CA+XidOFtkSjCgw_M5eApivmxXcU6x3mPOV5-CiVPUQkFQ0ywiw@mail.gmail.com>
	<50BB78B6.7090206@ecologic.eu>
Message-ID: <20121203061637.GC12019@mail.incertum.net>

Hello Karsten,

* Karsten Becker <karsten.becker at ecologic.eu>:
> What I can see in the mail.log is, that the incoming email towards a
> mailing list gets transported nearby "at once" from Postfix to Mailman.
> Then I see nothing in the Mailman logs for 20 seconds. Then Mailman
> prints out these message shown below and nearby "at once" I see the
> email in mail.log going out via Postfix.

if you want this debugged properly, we will need:

1. postconf -n output, as well as master.cf excerpts of the smtpd
   services you access
2. postfix logs from a posting that get's delayed, if possible,
   delivery "from outside" to mailman and from mailman back to
   postfix
3. the corresponding mailman log

All logs should contain the timestamps. Without full logs there is no
way we can help you solve this.


Cheers
Stefan

From Ralf.Hildebrandt at charite.de  Mon Dec  3 09:29:22 2012
From: Ralf.Hildebrandt at charite.de (Ralf Hildebrandt)
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 09:29:22 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman needs 20 seconds to complete per email
In-Reply-To: <20121203061637.GC12019@mail.incertum.net>
References: <50B4B7B9.7050303@ecologic.eu>
	<PC19932012112713420101872d0be6bc@MSAPIRO>
	<20121127215641.GC7365@charite.de>
	<CA+XidOFtkSjCgw_M5eApivmxXcU6x3mPOV5-CiVPUQkFQ0ywiw@mail.gmail.com>
	<50BB78B6.7090206@ecologic.eu>
	<20121203061637.GC12019@mail.incertum.net>
Message-ID: <20121203082922.GG27517@charite.de>

* Stefan Foerster <cite at incertum.net>:
> Hello Karsten,
> 
> * Karsten Becker <karsten.becker at ecologic.eu>:
> > What I can see in the mail.log is, that the incoming email towards a
> > mailing list gets transported nearby "at once" from Postfix to Mailman.
> > Then I see nothing in the Mailman logs for 20 seconds. Then Mailman
> > prints out these message shown below and nearby "at once" I see the
> > email in mail.log going out via Postfix.
> 
> if you want this debugged properly, we will need:
> 
> 1. postconf -n output, as well as master.cf excerpts of the smtpd
>    services you access
> 2. postfix logs from a posting that get's delayed, if possible,
>    delivery "from outside" to mailman and from mailman back to
>    postfix
> 3. the corresponding mailman log

Exactly.

-- 
Ralf Hildebrandt                   Charite Universit?tsmedizin Berlin
ralf.hildebrandt at charite.de        Campus Benjamin Franklin
http://www.charite.de              Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin
Gesch?ftsbereich IT, Abt. Netzwerk fon: +49-30-450.570.155

From karsten.becker at ecologic.eu  Mon Dec  3 10:27:53 2012
From: karsten.becker at ecologic.eu (Karsten Becker)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2012 10:27:53 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman needs 20 seconds to complete per email
In-Reply-To: <20121203061637.GC12019@mail.incertum.net>
References: <50B4B7B9.7050303@ecologic.eu>
	<PC19932012112713420101872d0be6bc@MSAPIRO>
	<20121127215641.GC7365@charite.de>
	<CA+XidOFtkSjCgw_M5eApivmxXcU6x3mPOV5-CiVPUQkFQ0ywiw@mail.gmail.com>
	<50BB78B6.7090206@ecologic.eu>
	<20121203061637.GC12019@mail.incertum.net>
Message-ID: <50BC7099.40607@ecologic.eu>

On 12/03/2012 07:16 AM, Stefan Foerster wrote:
> 1. postconf -n output, as well as master.cf excerpts of the smtpd
>    services you access
> 2. postfix logs from a posting that get's delayed, if possible,
>    delivery "from outside" to mailman and from mailman back to
>    postfix
> 3. the corresponding mailman log

Here we go, find the files attached.

Just inform me if something is missing...

If Ralf is wondering that he thinks he knows that kind of setup - the
whole mailing stuff got set up using his book...  :-)

Regards
Karsten
-------------- next part --------------
#
# Postfix master process configuration file.  For details on the format
# of the file, see the master(5) manual page (command: "man 5 master").
#
# Do not forget to execute "postfix reload" after editing this file.
#
# ==========================================================================
# service type  private unpriv  chroot  wakeup  maxproc command + args
#               (yes)   (yes)   (yes)   (never) (100)
# ==========================================================================
smtp      inet  n       -       -       -       -       smtpd
  -o smtpd_tls_auth_only=yes
  -o cleanup_service_name=pre-cleanup
submission inet n       -       -       -       -       smtpd
  -o smtpd_tls_security_level=encrypt
  -o smtpd_sasl_auth_enable=yes
  -o smtpd_client_restrictions=permit_sasl_authenticated,reject
  -o milter_macro_daemon_name=ORIGINATING
  -o cleanup_service_name=pre-cleanup
  -o content_filter=smtp-amavis:[127.0.0.1]:10027
smtps     inet  n       -       -       -       -       smtpd
  -o smtpd_tls_wrappermode=yes
  -o smtpd_sasl_auth_enable=yes
  -o smtpd_client_restrictions=permit_sasl_authenticated,reject
  -o milter_macro_daemon_name=ORIGINATING
  -o cleanup_service_name=pre-cleanup
  -o content_filter=smtp-amavis:[127.0.0.1]:10027
#628       inet  n       -       -       -       -       qmqpd
pickup    fifo  n       -       -       60      1       pickup
  -o content_filter=
  -o receive_override_options=no_header_body_checks
  -o cleanup_service_name=pre-cleanup
pre-cleanup unix    n       -       n       -       0       cleanup
  -o virtual_alias_maps=
cleanup   unix  n       -       -       -       0       cleanup
  -o mime_header_checks=
  -o nested_header_checks=
  -o body_checks=
  -o header_checks=
#  -o always_bcc=archive at foo.de
qmgr      fifo  n       -       n       300     1       qmgr
#qmgr     fifo  n       -       -       300     1       oqmgr
tlsmgr    unix  -       -       -       1000?   1       tlsmgr
rewrite   unix  -       -       -       -       -       trivial-rewrite
bounce    unix  -       -       -       -       0       bounce
defer     unix  -       -       -       -       0       bounce
trace     unix  -       -       -       -       0       bounce
verify    unix  -       -       -       -       1       verify
flush     unix  n       -       -       1000?   0       flush
proxymap  unix  -       -       n       -       -       proxymap
proxywrite unix -       -       n       -       1       proxymap
smtp      unix  -       -       -       -       -       smtp
# When relaying mail as backup MX, disable fallback_relay to avoid MX loops
relay     unix  -       -       -       -       -       smtp
	-o smtp_fallback_relay=
#       -o smtp_helo_timeout=5 -o smtp_connect_timeout=5
showq     unix  n       -       -       -       -       showq
error     unix  -       -       -       -       -       error
retry     unix  -       -       -       -       -       error
discard   unix  -       -       -       -       -       discard
#local     unix  -       n       n       -       -       local
virtual   unix  -       n       n       -       -       virtual
lmtp      unix  -       -       -       -       -       lmtp
anvil     unix  -       -       -       -       1       anvil
scache    unix  -       -       -       -       1       scache
#
# ====================================================================
# Interfaces to non-Postfix software. Be sure to examine the manual
# pages of the non-Postfix software to find out what options it wants.
#
# Many of the following services use the Postfix pipe(8) delivery
# agent.  See the pipe(8) man page for information about ${recipient}
# and other message envelope options.
# ====================================================================
#
# maildrop. See the Postfix MAILDROP_README file for details.
# Also specify in main.cf: maildrop_destination_recipient_limit=1
#
maildrop  unix  -       n       n       -       -       pipe
  flags=DRhu user=vmail argv=/usr/bin/maildrop -d ${recipient}
#
# ====================================================================
#
# Recent Cyrus versions can use the existing "lmtp" master.cf entry.
#
# Specify in cyrus.conf:
#   lmtp    cmd="lmtpd -a" listen="localhost:lmtp" proto=tcp4
#
# Specify in main.cf one or more of the following:
#  mailbox_transport = lmtp:inet:localhost
#  virtual_transport = lmtp:inet:localhost
#
# ====================================================================
#
# Cyrus 2.1.5 (Amos Gouaux)
# Also specify in main.cf: cyrus_destination_recipient_limit=1
#
#cyrus     unix  -       n       n       -       -       pipe
#  user=cyrus argv=/cyrus/bin/deliver -e -r ${sender} -m ${extension} ${user}
#
# ====================================================================
# Old example of delivery via Cyrus.
#
#old-cyrus unix  -       n       n       -       -       pipe
#  flags=R user=cyrus argv=/cyrus/bin/deliver -e -m ${extension} ${user}
#
# ====================================================================
#
# See the Postfix UUCP_README file for configuration details.
#
uucp      unix  -       n       n       -       -       pipe
  flags=Fqhu user=uucp argv=uux -r -n -z -a$sender - $nexthop!rmail ($recipient)
#
# Other external delivery methods.
#
ifmail    unix  -       n       n       -       -       pipe
  flags=F user=ftn argv=/usr/lib/ifmail/ifmail -r $nexthop ($recipient)
bsmtp     unix  -       n       n       -       -       pipe
  flags=Fq. user=bsmtp argv=/usr/lib/bsmtp/bsmtp -t$nexthop -f$sender $recipient
scalemail-backend unix	-	n	n	-	2	pipe
  flags=R user=scalemail argv=/usr/lib/scalemail/bin/scalemail-store ${nexthop} ${user} ${extension}
mailman   unix  -       n       n       -       -       pipe
  flags=FR user=list argv=/usr/lib/mailman/bin/postfix-to-mailman.py ${nexthop} ${user}
dovecot   unix  -       n       n       -       -       pipe
  flags=DRhu user=vmail:vmail argv=/usr/local/dovecot/libexec/dovecot/dovecot-lda -d ${recipient}
vacation  unix  -       n       n       -       -       pipe
  flags=Rq user=vacation argv=/srv/vacation/vacation.pl -f ${sender} ${recipient}
policy-spf unix -       n       n       -       -       spawn
     user=nobody argv=/usr/sbin/postfix-policyd-spf-perl
# Everything to smtp-amavis goes to Amavis
smtp-amavis     unix    -       -       -       -       15       smtp
        -o smtp_data_done_timeout=1200
        -o smtp_send_xforward_command=yes
        -o disable_dns_lookups=yes
        -o max_use=15
# This is the re-injection port Amavis -> Postfix
127.0.0.1:10025 inet    n       -       -       -       -       smtpd
        -o smtpd_authorized_xforward_hosts=127.0.0.0/8
        -o content_filter=
        -o local_recipient_maps=
        -o relay_recipient_maps=
        -o smtpd_restriction_classes=
        -o smtpd_delay_reject=no
        -o smtpd_client_restrictions=permit_mynetworks,reject
        -o smtpd_helo_restrictions=
        -o smtpd_sender_restrictions=
        -o smtpd_recipient_restrictions=permit_mynetworks,reject
        -o smtpd_data_restrictions=reject_unauth_pipelining
        -o smtpd_end_of_data_restrictions=
        -o mynetworks=127.0.0.0/8
        -o smtpd_error_sleep_time=0
        -o smtpd_soft_error_limit=1001
        -o smtpd_hard_error_limit=1000
        -o smtpd_client_connection_count_limit=0
        -o smtpd_client_connection_rate_limit=0
        -o receive_override_options=no_header_body_checks,no_unknown_recipient_checks
# This is the injection port Mailman -> Postfix
127.0.0.1:10030 inet    n       -       -       -       -       smtpd
        -o smtpd_authorized_xforward_hosts=127.0.0.0/8
        -o content_filter=
        -o local_recipient_maps=
        -o relay_recipient_maps=
	-o disable_dns_lookups=yes
        -o smtpd_restriction_classes=
        -o smtpd_delay_reject=no
        -o smtpd_client_restrictions=permit_mynetworks,reject
        -o smtpd_helo_restrictions=
        -o smtpd_sender_restrictions=
        -o smtpd_recipient_restrictions=permit_mynetworks,reject
        -o smtpd_data_restrictions=reject_unauth_pipelining
        -o smtpd_end_of_data_restrictions=
        -o mynetworks=127.0.0.0/8
        -o smtpd_error_sleep_time=0
        -o smtpd_soft_error_limit=1001
        -o smtpd_hard_error_limit=1000
        -o smtpd_client_connection_count_limit=0
        -o smtpd_client_connection_rate_limit=0
        -o receive_override_options=no_header_body_checks,no_unknown_recipient_checks
-------------- next part --------------
Dec 03 09:53:02 2012 (1831) post to karsten-test from karsten.becker at foo.de, size=2344, message-id=<50BC6857.6000204 at foo.de>, success
-------------- next part --------------
address_verify_map = btree:/srv/postfix/lib/verified_senders
address_verify_sender = postmaster at foo.de
anvil_rate_time_unit = 1h
append_dot_mydomain = no
biff = no
broken_sasl_auth_clients = yes
config_directory = /etc/postfix
content_filter = smtp-amavis:[127.0.0.1]:10024
data_directory = /srv/postfix/lib
default_destination_concurrency_limit = 50
default_destination_recipient_limit = 50
default_process_limit = 200
delay_warning_time = 2h
disable_vrfy_command = yes
header_checks = pcre:/etc/postfix/header_checks
inet_interfaces = all
inet_protocols = ipv4
local_recipient_maps = 
local_transport = error:Local mail delivery is disabled!
mail_spool_directory = /srv/postfix/spool
mailbox_size_limit = 0
maximal_queue_lifetime = 7d
message_size_limit = 20971520
mydestination = 
myhostname = mail01.foodmz.local
mynetworks = 127.0.0.0/8 [::ffff:127.0.0.0]/104 [::1]/128 80.149.XXX.YYY/28 85.214.XXX.YYY/32 89.238.XXX.YYY/32
myorigin = $myhostname
proxy_read_maps = $local_recipient_maps $mydestination $virtual_alias_maps $virtual_alias_domains $virtual_mailbox_maps $virtual_mailbox_domains $relay_recipient_maps $relay_domains $canonical_maps $sender_canonical_maps $recipient_canonical_maps $relocated_maps $transport_maps $mynetworks $smtpd_sender_login_maps
qmgr_message_active_limit = 40000
qmgr_message_recipient_limit = 40000
readme_directory = no
recipient_canonical_maps = pcre:/etc/postfix/recipient_canonical
recipient_delimiter = +
relayhost = [mx01.foo.de]
sender_canonical_maps = pcre:/etc/postfix/sender_canonical
show_user_unknown_table_name = no
smtp_destination_concurrency_limit = 100
smtp_fallback_relay = [mx02.foo.de]
smtp_helo_timeout = 60s
smtp_tls_session_cache_database = btree:${data_directory}/smtp_scache
smtpd_banner = $myhostname ESMTP Ecologic Institute ready
smtpd_client_connection_count_limit = 100
smtpd_client_connection_rate_limit = 3600
smtpd_client_message_rate_limit = 3600
smtpd_client_restrictions = check_client_access hash:/etc/postfix/amavis_bypass_mx        check_client_access cidr:/etc/postfix/amavis_bypass_lan
smtpd_data_restrictions = permit_mynetworks	reject_multi_recipient_bounce        reject_unauth_pipelining
smtpd_helo_required = yes
smtpd_recipient_restrictions = reject_non_fqdn_recipient	reject_non_fqdn_sender        check_sender_access hash:/etc/postfix/internal_domains        check_sender_access hash:/etc/postfix/tine20_calendar        check_recipient_access hash:/etc/postfix/roleaccount_exceptions        reject_unknown_recipient_domain        reject_unknown_sender_domain        reject_authenticated_sender_login_mismatch        permit_sasl_authenticated        permit_mynetworks        reject_unauth_destination        check_sender_access hash:/etc/postfix/mailerdaemon_exception        check_sender_access hash:/etc/postfix/sender_whitelist	check_client_access cidr:/etc/postfix/client_whitelist        check_sender_mx_access cidr:/etc/postfix/bogus_mx        check_helo_access pcre:/etc/postfix/helo_checks        reject_unauth_pipelining        reject_non_fqdn_helo_hostname        reject_invalid_helo_hostname        reject_unknown_client_hostname        check_policy_service inet:127.0.0.1:12525        check_policy_service unix:private/policy-spf        check_policy_service inet:127.0.0.1:10023        reject_unverified_sender        permit
smtpd_restriction_classes = has_internal_ip_as_sender	tine20_calendar_domains
smtpd_sasl_auth_enable = yes
smtpd_sasl_authenticated_header = yes
smtpd_sasl_path = private/auth_dovecot
smtpd_sasl_type = dovecot
smtpd_sender_login_maps = proxy:mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql_sender_login_maps.cf
smtpd_tls_cert_file = /etc/postfix/ssl/mail01.foodmz.local.crt
smtpd_tls_key_file = /etc/postfix/ssl/mail01.foodmz.local.key
smtpd_tls_session_cache_database = btree:${data_directory}/smtpd_scache
smtpd_use_tls = yes
transport_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/transport
unknown_address_reject_code = 554
unknown_client_reject_code = 554
virtual_alias_maps = proxy:mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql_virtual_alias_maps.cf, proxy:mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql_virtual_alias_alias_maps.cf, hash:/etc/postfix/mailman_aliases
virtual_gid_maps = static:1002
virtual_mailbox_base = /srv/vmail/user-mailboxes
virtual_mailbox_domains = proxy:mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql_virtual_mailbox_domains_maps.cf
virtual_mailbox_limit = 10737418240
virtual_mailbox_maps = proxy:mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql_virtual_mailbox_maps.cf, proxy:mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql_virtual_mailbox_alias_maps.cf
virtual_minimum_uid = 104
virtual_transport = dovecot
virtual_uid_maps = static:1008
-------------- next part --------------
Dec 03 09:53:02 2012 (1831) <50BC6857.6000204 at foo.de> smtp to karsten-test for 9 recips, completed in 21.038 seconds

From lstone19 at stonejongleux.com  Mon Dec  3 13:52:14 2012
From: lstone19 at stonejongleux.com (Larry Stone)
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 06:52:14 -0600
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman needs 20 seconds to complete per email
In-Reply-To: <50BC7099.40607@ecologic.eu>
References: <50B4B7B9.7050303@ecologic.eu>
	<PC19932012112713420101872d0be6bc@MSAPIRO>
	<20121127215641.GC7365@charite.de>
	<CA+XidOFtkSjCgw_M5eApivmxXcU6x3mPOV5-CiVPUQkFQ0ywiw@mail.gmail.com>
	<50BB78B6.7090206@ecologic.eu>
	<20121203061637.GC12019@mail.incertum.net>
	<50BC7099.40607@ecologic.eu>
Message-ID: <69B87747-A65B-4238-902C-61C1EC4C5A34@stonejongleux.com>

Missing the most important thing which is a Postfix log.

-- 
Larry Stone
lstone19 at stonejongleux.com
http://www.stonejongleux.com/



On Dec 3, 2012, at 3:27 AM, Karsten Becker <karsten.becker at ecologic.eu> wrote:

> On 12/03/2012 07:16 AM, Stefan Foerster wrote:
>> 1. postconf -n output, as well as master.cf excerpts of the smtpd
>>   services you access
>> 2. postfix logs from a posting that get's delayed, if possible,
>>   delivery "from outside" to mailman and from mailman back to
>>   postfix
>> 3. the corresponding mailman log
> 
> Here we go, find the files attached.
> 
> Just inform me if something is missing...
> 
> If Ralf is wondering that he thinks he knows that kind of setup - the
> whole mailing stuff got set up using his book...  :-)
> 
> Regards
> Karsten
> <master.cf><post.txt><postconf.conf><smtp.txt>------------------------------------------------------
> Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
> Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
> Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
> Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
> Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/lstone19%40stonejongleux.com



From karsten.becker at ecologic.eu  Mon Dec  3 14:13:42 2012
From: karsten.becker at ecologic.eu (Karsten Becker)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2012 14:13:42 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman needs 20 seconds to complete per email
In-Reply-To: <69B87747-A65B-4238-902C-61C1EC4C5A34@stonejongleux.com>
References: <50B4B7B9.7050303@ecologic.eu>
	<PC19932012112713420101872d0be6bc@MSAPIRO>
	<20121127215641.GC7365@charite.de>
	<CA+XidOFtkSjCgw_M5eApivmxXcU6x3mPOV5-CiVPUQkFQ0ywiw@mail.gmail.com>
	<50BB78B6.7090206@ecologic.eu>
	<20121203061637.GC12019@mail.incertum.net>
	<50BC7099.40607@ecologic.eu>
	<69B87747-A65B-4238-902C-61C1EC4C5A34@stonejongleux.com>
Message-ID: <50BCA586.70709@ecologic.eu>

Damn it, forgot it to attach...  *grml*

Regards
Karsten

On 12/03/2012 01:52 PM, Larry Stone wrote:
> Missing the most important thing which is a Postfix log.
> 


From karsten.becker at ecologic.eu  Mon Dec  3 16:09:48 2012
From: karsten.becker at ecologic.eu (Karsten Becker)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2012 16:09:48 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman needs 20 seconds to complete per email
In-Reply-To: <50BCA586.70709@ecologic.eu>
References: <50B4B7B9.7050303@ecologic.eu>
	<PC19932012112713420101872d0be6bc@MSAPIRO>
	<20121127215641.GC7365@charite.de>
	<CA+XidOFtkSjCgw_M5eApivmxXcU6x3mPOV5-CiVPUQkFQ0ywiw@mail.gmail.com>
	<50BB78B6.7090206@ecologic.eu>
	<20121203061637.GC12019@mail.incertum.net>
	<50BC7099.40607@ecologic.eu>
	<69B87747-A65B-4238-902C-61C1EC4C5A34@stonejongleux.com>
	<50BCA586.70709@ecologic.eu>
Message-ID: <50BCC0BC.9030801@ecologic.eu>

Oh, seems like it is getting cut... okay, here it is pasted directly
into the email:

> Dec  3 09:52:39 mail01 postfix/smtpd[15196]: connect from fw01.ecodmz.local[80.149.253.142]
> Dec  3 09:52:39 mail01 postfix/smtpd[15196]: 8BA32172007D: client=fw01.ecodmz.local[80.149.253.142], sasl_method=PLAIN, sasl_username=karsten.becker at foo.de
> Dec  3 09:52:39 mail01 postfix/cleanup[15129]: 8BA32172007D: message-id=<50BC6857.6000204 at foo.de>
> Dec  3 09:52:39 mail01 postfix/qmgr[15109]: 8BA32172007D: from=<karsten.becker at foo.de>, size=985, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
> Dec  3 09:52:39 mail01 postfix/smtpd[15196]: disconnect from fw01.ecodmz.local[80.149.253.142]
> Dec  3 09:52:39 mail01 amavis[23946]: (23946-06) ESMTP::10027 /var/lib/amavis/tmp/amavis-20121203T082655-23946: <karsten.becker at foo.de> -> <karsten-test at lists.foo.de> Received: SIZE=985 from mail01.ecodmz.local ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail01.ecodmz.local [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-maia, port 10027) with ESMTP id 23946-06 for <karsten-test at lists.foo.de>; Mon,  3 Dec 2012 09:52:39 +0100 (CET)
> Dec  3 09:52:39 mail01 amavis[23946]: (23946-06) Checking: BYPASS_LAN [80.149.253.142] <karsten.becker at foo.de> -> <karsten-test at lists.foo.de>
> Dec  3 09:52:39 mail01 amavis[23946]: (23946-06) FWD via SMTP: [127.0.0.1]:10025 <karsten.becker at foo.de> -> <karsten-test at lists.foo.de>
> Dec  3 09:52:39 mail01 postfix/smtpd[15139]: connect from localhost[127.0.0.1]
> Dec  3 09:52:39 mail01 postfix/smtpd[15139]: B0E971720080: client=fw01.ecodmz.local[80.149.253.142]
> Dec  3 09:52:39 mail01 postfix/cleanup[15140]: B0E971720080: message-id=<50BC6857.6000204 at foo.de>
> Dec  3 09:52:39 mail01 postfix/qmgr[15109]: B0E971720080: from=<karsten.becker at foo.de>, size=1463, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
> Dec  3 09:52:39 mail01 postfix/smtpd[15139]: disconnect from localhost[127.0.0.1]
> Dec  3 09:52:39 mail01 postfix/smtp[15137]: 8BA32172007D: to=<karsten-test at lists.foo.de>, relay=127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1]:10027, delay=0.23, delays=0.08/0/0/0.14, dsn=2.6.0, status=sent (250 2.6.0 Ok, id=23946-06, from MTA: 250 2.0.0 Ok: queued as B0E971720080)
> Dec  3 09:52:39 mail01 postfix/qmgr[15109]: 8BA32172007D: removed
> Dec  3 09:52:39 mail01 amavis[23946]: (23946-06) extra modules loaded: /usr/lib/perl5/auto/NetAddr/IP/Util/inet_n2dx.al, /usr/lib/perl5/auto/NetAddr/IP/Util/ipv6_n2d.al, /usr/lib/perl5/auto/NetAddr/IP/Util/ipv6_n2x.al, Error.pm, Mail/DKIM/Algorithm/Base.pm, Mail/DKIM/Algorithm/dk_rsa_sha1.pm, Mail/DKIM/Algorithm/rsa_sha1.pm, Mail/DKIM/Algorithm/rsa_sha256.pm, Mail/DKIM/AuthorDomainPolicy.pm, Mail/DKIM/Canonicalization/Base.pm, Mail/DKIM/Canonicalization/DkCommon.pm, Mail/DKIM/Canonicalization/DkimCommon.pm, Mail/DKIM/Canonicalization/dk_nofws.pm, Mail/DKIM/Canonicalization/dk_simple.pm, Mail/DKIM/Canonicalization/nowsp.pm, Mail/DKIM/Canonicalization/relaxed.pm, Mail/DKIM/Canonicalization/simple.pm, Mail/DKIM/Common.pm, Mail/DKIM/DNS.pm, Mail/DKIM/DkPolicy.pm, Mail/DKIM/DkSignature.pm, Mail/DKIM/DkimPolicy.pm, Mail/DKIM/Key.pm, Mail/DKIM/KeyValueList.pm, Mail/DKIM/MessageParser.pm, Mail/DKIM/Policy.pm, Mail/DKIM/PublicKey.pm, Mail/DKIM/Signature.pm, Mail/DKIM/Verifier.pm, Ma
 il/SPF.pm
, Mail/SPF/Base.pm...                                                              
> Dec  3 09:52:39 mail01 amavis[23946]: (23946-06) ..., Mail/SPF/Exception.pm, Mail/SPF/MacroString.pm, Mail/SPF/Record.pm, Mail/SPF/Request.pm, Mail/SPF/Result.pm, Mail/SPF/Server.pm, Mail/SPF/Util.pm, Mail/SpamAssassin/Bayes/CombineChi.pm, Mail/SpamAssassin/Locales.pm, Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/Bayes.pm, Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/BodyEval.pm, Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/Check.pm, Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/DKIM.pm, Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/DNSEval.pm, Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/FreeMail.pm, Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/HTMLEval.pm, Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/HTTPSMismatch.pm, Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/HeaderEval.pm, Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/ImageInfo.pm, Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/MIMEEval.pm, Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/RelayEval.pm, Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/URIDetail.pm, Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/URIEval.pm, Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/VBounce.pm, Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/WLBLEval.pm, unicore/lib/gc_sc/Word.pl, version.pm                                                                            
          
                                                                                   
> Dec  3 09:52:39 mail01 dovecot: imap(karsten.becker.intern at foo.de): Disconnected: Disconnected in IDLE in=14712 out=131057                                                          
> Dec  3 09:52:39 mail01 postfix/pipe[15199]: B0E971720080: to=<karsten-test at lists.foo.de>, relay=mailman, delay=0.21, delays=0.05/0.01/0/0.16, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (delivered via mailman service)                                                                                                                                                                    
>                                                                                                                                                                                     
>                                                                                                                                                                                     
>                                                                                                                                                                                     
>                                                                                                                                                                                     
> Dec  3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/smtpd[15221]: 0D45F172007D: client=localhost[127.0.0.1]                                                                                              
> Dec  3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/cleanup[15140]: 0D45F172007D: message-id=<50BC6857.6000204 at foo.de>                                                                                   
> Dec  3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/qmgr[15109]: 0D45F172007D: from=<karsten-test-bounces at lists.foo.de>, size=2526, nrcpt=2 (queue active)                                               
> Dec  3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/smtpd[15221]: 0F2D51720080: client=localhost[127.0.0.1]                                                                                              
> Dec  3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/cleanup[15140]: 0F2D51720080: message-id=<50BC6857.6000204 at foo.de>                                                                                   
> Dec  3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/qmgr[15109]: 0F2D51720080: from=<karsten-test-bounces at lists.foo.de>, size=2556, nrcpt=1 (queue active)                                               
> Dec  3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/smtpd[15221]: 109CC1720081: client=localhost[127.0.0.1]                                                                                              
> Dec  3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/cleanup[15140]: 109CC1720081: message-id=<50BC6857.6000204 at foo.de>
> Dec  3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/qmgr[15109]: 109CC1720081: from=<karsten-test-bounces at lists.foo.de>, size=2526, nrcpt=6 (queue active)
> Dec  3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/smtpd[15221]: disconnect from localhost[127.0.0.1]
> Dec  3 09:53:02 mail01 dovecot: lda(toni.testa at bar.us): sieve: msgid=<50BC6857.6000204 at foo.de>: stored mail into mailbox 'INBOX'
> Dec  3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/pipe[15222]: 0D45F172007D: to=<toni.testa at bar.us>, relay=dovecot, delay=0.1, delays=0.01/0.01/0/0.09, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (delivered via dovecot service)
> Dec  3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/smtp[15141]: 0D45F172007D: to=<erna.testa at gmx.net>, relay=mx01.foo.de[85.214.42.230]:25, delay=0.21, delays=0.01/0/0.02/0.19, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 Ok: queued as 2164B7408D)
> Dec  3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/smtp[15223]: 0F2D51720080: to=<erna.testa2 at gmail.com>, relay=mx01.foo.de[85.214.42.230]:25, delay=0.2, delays=0/0.01/0.05/0.15, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 Ok: queued as 23C087408E)
> Dec  3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/qmgr[15109]: 0D45F172007D: removed
> Dec  3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/qmgr[15109]: 0F2D51720080: removed
> Dec  3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/smtp[15225]: 109CC1720081: to=<bernhard.glomm.intern at foo.de>, relay=mx01.foo.de[85.214.42.230]:25, delay=0.23, delays=0.01/0.01/0.06/0.16, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 Ok: queued as 275797408F)
> Dec  3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/smtp[15225]: 109CC1720081: to=<bernhard.glomm at foo.de>, relay=mx01.foo.de[85.214.42.230]:25, delay=0.23, delays=0.01/0.01/0.06/0.16, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 Ok: queued as 275797408F)
> Dec  3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/smtp[15225]: 109CC1720081: to=<frank.rudek at foo.de>, relay=mx01.foo.de[85.214.42.230]:25, delay=0.23, delays=0.01/0.01/0.06/0.16, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 Ok: queued as 275797408F)
> Dec  3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/smtp[15225]: 109CC1720081: to=<karsten.becker at foo.de>, relay=mx01.foo.de[85.214.42.230]:25, delay=0.23, delays=0.01/0.01/0.06/0.16, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 Ok: queued as 275797408F)
> Dec  3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/smtp[15225]: 109CC1720081: to=<b.glomm at gmx.de>, relay=mx01.foo.de[85.214.42.230]:25, delay=0.23, delays=0.01/0.01/0.06/0.16, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 Ok: queued as 275797408F)
> Dec  3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/smtp[15225]: 109CC1720081: to=<karstenrbecker at gmx.de>, relay=mx01.foo.de[85.214.42.230]:25, delay=0.23, delays=0.01/0.01/0.06/0.16, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 Ok: queued as 275797408F)
> Dec  3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/qmgr[15109]: 109CC1720081: removed

From lstone19 at stonejongleux.com  Mon Dec  3 17:35:35 2012
From: lstone19 at stonejongleux.com (Larry Stone)
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 10:35:35 -0600 (CST)
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman needs 20 seconds to complete per email
In-Reply-To: <50BCC0BC.9030801@ecologic.eu>
References: <50B4B7B9.7050303@ecologic.eu>
	<PC19932012112713420101872d0be6bc@MSAPIRO>
	<20121127215641.GC7365@charite.de>
	<CA+XidOFtkSjCgw_M5eApivmxXcU6x3mPOV5-CiVPUQkFQ0ywiw@mail.gmail.com>
	<50BB78B6.7090206@ecologic.eu>
	<20121203061637.GC12019@mail.incertum.net>
	<50BC7099.40607@ecologic.eu>
	<69B87747-A65B-4238-902C-61C1EC4C5A34@stonejongleux.com>
	<50BCA586.70709@ecologic.eu> <50BCC0BC.9030801@ecologic.eu>
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.00.1212031027160.37378@server-imac.local>

A few comments below on selected lines:

On Mon, 3 Dec 2012, Karsten Becker wrote:

>> Dec 3 09:52:39 mail01 postfix/pipe[15199]: B0E971720080: 
>> to=<karsten-test at lists.foo.de>, relay=mailman, delay=0.21, 
>> delays=0.05/0.01/0/0.16, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (delivered via mailman 
>> service)

As I now see in your master.cf, you're using the postfix-to-mailman.py 
script. This is a third-party product and is not supported by the Mailman 
developers. I know nothing about postfix-to-mailman so I have no idea if 
that's the source of the delay.

>> Dec 3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/smtpd[15221]: 0D45F172007D: 
>> client=localhost[127.0.0.1]

OK, now it's 23 seconds later but we're missing the "connect from" log 
line from Postfix. At this point, Postfix already has the message as 
evidenced by the queue-ID (0D45F172007D) in the message. So without seeing 
when the connect occurred, we don't know if the delay is in Mailman or 
Postfix.

-- Larry Stone
    lstone19 at stonejongleux.com

From pyz at brama.com  Mon Dec  3 19:30:41 2012
From: pyz at brama.com (Max Pyziur)
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 13:30:41 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Mailman-Users] OT - Mailman and Back to the Future
Message-ID: <49976.38.108.207.77.1354559441.squirrel@webmail.brama.com>

Greetings,

I noticed that Mailman-users has emails archived from June 2013 and April
2024; is this a bug or a feature?
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/

;-)

Max Pyziur
pyz at brama.com

From Ralf.Hildebrandt at charite.de  Mon Dec  3 19:38:14 2012
From: Ralf.Hildebrandt at charite.de (Ralf Hildebrandt)
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 19:38:14 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] OT - Mailman and Back to the Future
In-Reply-To: <49976.38.108.207.77.1354559441.squirrel@webmail.brama.com>
References: <49976.38.108.207.77.1354559441.squirrel@webmail.brama.com>
Message-ID: <20121203183814.GB5482@charite.de>

* Max Pyziur <pyz at brama.com>:
> Greetings,
> 
> I noticed that Mailman-users has emails archived from June 2013 and April
> 2024; is this a bug or a feature?
> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/

One could argue that the archiver shouldn't use the "Date: " provided
by the sender, but another date.

But the mails were archived correctly, at least according to their
respective Date: headers.

-- 
Ralf Hildebrandt                   Charite Universit?tsmedizin Berlin
ralf.hildebrandt at charite.de        Campus Benjamin Franklin
http://www.charite.de              Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin
Gesch?ftsbereich IT, Abt. Netzwerk fon: +49-30-450.570.155

From karsten.becker at ecologic.eu  Mon Dec  3 23:58:54 2012
From: karsten.becker at ecologic.eu (Karsten Becker)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2012 23:58:54 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman needs 20 seconds to complete per email
In-Reply-To: <alpine.OSX.2.00.1212031027160.37378@server-imac.local>
References: <50B4B7B9.7050303@ecologic.eu>
	<PC19932012112713420101872d0be6bc@MSAPIRO>
	<20121127215641.GC7365@charite.de>
	<CA+XidOFtkSjCgw_M5eApivmxXcU6x3mPOV5-CiVPUQkFQ0ywiw@mail.gmail.com>
	<50BB78B6.7090206@ecologic.eu>
	<20121203061637.GC12019@mail.incertum.net>
	<50BC7099.40607@ecologic.eu>
	<69B87747-A65B-4238-902C-61C1EC4C5A34@stonejongleux.com>
	<50BCA586.70709@ecologic.eu> <50BCC0BC.9030801@ecologic.eu>
	<alpine.OSX.2.00.1212031027160.37378@server-imac.local>
Message-ID: <50BD2EAE.9000003@ecologic.eu>



On 12/03/2012 05:35 PM, Larry Stone wrote:
>>> Dec 3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/smtpd[15221]: 0D45F172007D:
>>> client=localhost[127.0.0.1]
> 
> OK, now it's 23 seconds later but we're missing the "connect from" log
> line from Postfix. At this point, Postfix already has the message as
> evidenced by the queue-ID (0D45F172007D) in the message. So without
> seeing when the connect occurred, we don't know if the delay is in
> Mailman or Postfix.

That should help:

> Dec  3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/smtpd[15221]: connect from localhost[127.0.0.1]
> Dec  3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/smtpd[15221]: 0D45F172007D: client=localhost[127.0.0.1]

Seems like I need to take a closer look at the postfix-to-mailman.py...

Regards
Karsten

From mark at msapiro.net  Tue Dec  4 00:23:21 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2012 15:23:21 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman needs 20 seconds to complete per email
In-Reply-To: <50BD2EAE.9000003@ecologic.eu>
References: <50B4B7B9.7050303@ecologic.eu>
	<PC19932012112713420101872d0be6bc@MSAPIRO>
	<20121127215641.GC7365@charite.de>
	<CA+XidOFtkSjCgw_M5eApivmxXcU6x3mPOV5-CiVPUQkFQ0ywiw@mail.gmail.com>
	<50BB78B6.7090206@ecologic.eu>
	<20121203061637.GC12019@mail.incertum.net>
	<50BC7099.40607@ecologic.eu>
	<69B87747-A65B-4238-902C-61C1EC4C5A34@stonejongleux.com>
	<50BCA586.70709@ecologic.eu> <50BCC0BC.9030801@ecologic.eu>
	<alpine.OSX.2.00.1212031027160.37378@server-imac.local>
	<50BD2EAE.9000003@ecologic.eu>
Message-ID: <051684df-54e0-4ee8-b987-748718f020a8@email.android.com>

Karsten Becker <karsten.becker at ecologic.eu> wrote:
>
>Seems like I need to take a closer look at the postfix-to-mailman.py...


I may have more after I return to a real MUA, but postfix_to_mailman.py is NOT the problem. It only does delivery TO Mailman.  Your issue is with outgoing mail from Mailman.


-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

From mark at msapiro.net  Tue Dec  4 04:22:30 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2012 19:22:30 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman needs 20 seconds to complete per email
In-Reply-To: <alpine.OSX.2.00.1212031027160.37378@server-imac.local>
References: <50B4B7B9.7050303@ecologic.eu>
	<PC19932012112713420101872d0be6bc@MSAPIRO>
	<20121127215641.GC7365@charite.de>
	<CA+XidOFtkSjCgw_M5eApivmxXcU6x3mPOV5-CiVPUQkFQ0ywiw@mail.gmail.com>
	<50BB78B6.7090206@ecologic.eu>
	<20121203061637.GC12019@mail.incertum.net>
	<50BC7099.40607@ecologic.eu>
	<69B87747-A65B-4238-902C-61C1EC4C5A34@stonejongleux.com>
	<50BCA586.70709@ecologic.eu> <50BCC0BC.9030801@ecologic.eu>
	<alpine.OSX.2.00.1212031027160.37378@server-imac.local>
Message-ID: <50BD6C76.4010701@msapiro.net>

On 12/3/2012 8:35 AM, Larry Stone wrote:
> A few comments below on selected lines:
> 
> On Mon, 3 Dec 2012, Karsten Becker wrote:
> 
>>> Dec 3 09:52:39 mail01 postfix/pipe[15199]: B0E971720080:
>>> to=<karsten-test at lists.foo.de>, relay=mailman, delay=0.21,
>>> delays=0.05/0.01/0/0.16, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (delivered via
>>> mailman service)
> 
> As I now see in your master.cf, you're using the postfix-to-mailman.py
> script. This is a third-party product and is not supported by the
> Mailman developers. I know nothing about postfix-to-mailman so I have no
> idea if that's the source of the delay.


As I said in my reply earlier, the issue has nothing to do with
postfix_to_mailman.py. This module only delivers mail to Mailman. We
know Mailman got the mail without delay because 1) Postfix is telling us
that above, and 2) from the smtp log, OutgoingRunner got the outgoing
message 21.038 seconds before 09:53:02, i.e. at 9:52:40 or :41, just 1
or two seconds after postfix_to_mailman.py delivered it to Mailman's in/
queue.


>>> Dec 3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/smtpd[15221]: 0D45F172007D:
>>> client=localhost[127.0.0.1]
> 
> OK, now it's 23 seconds later but we're missing the "connect from" log
> line from Postfix. At this point, Postfix already has the message as
> evidenced by the queue-ID (0D45F172007D) in the message. So without
> seeing when the connect occurred, we don't know if the delay is in
> Mailman or Postfix.


Exactly, but I clain the delay is in the SMTP interaction between
OutgoingRunner and Postfix. To narrow it down, pleas do what I suggested
twice before. See the FAQ at <http://wiki.list.org/x/-IA9>. Add the

        self.__conn.set_debuglevel(1)

in the definition of __connect in Mailman/Handlers/SPTPDirect.py,
restart Mailman, send a post and then look at Mailman's error log which
should log with timestamps each step of the SMTP transaction.

That will tell you where the delay is more precisely that Postfix's log.

As to why there is a delay, I am not a real Postfix expert, I just
pretend, so I'm not going to look at your postconf -n output until you
do the above and report what you find.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From mark at msapiro.net  Tue Dec  4 04:34:29 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2012 19:34:29 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] OT - Mailman and Back to the Future
In-Reply-To: <20121203183814.GB5482@charite.de>
References: <49976.38.108.207.77.1354559441.squirrel@webmail.brama.com>
	<20121203183814.GB5482@charite.de>
Message-ID: <50BD6F45.8090406@msapiro.net>

On 12/3/2012 10:38 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> * Max Pyziur <pyz at brama.com>:
>>
>> I noticed that Mailman-users has emails archived from June 2013 and April
>> 2024; is this a bug or a feature?
>> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/
> 
> One could argue that the archiver shouldn't use the "Date: " provided
> by the sender, but another date.
> 
> But the mails were archived correctly, at least according to their
> respective Date: headers.


For a long time (many years), Mailman has had code in the archiver to do
one of three things. It has a settings which default to

ARCHIVER_CLOBBER_DATE_POLICY = 2
ARCHIVER_ALLOWABLE_SANE_DATE_SKEW = days(15)

which means if the message's Date: header is more than
ARCHIVER_ALLOWABLE_SANE_DATE_SKEW (15 days) different from the received
date, use the received date. Other possible settings are

ARCHIVER_CLOBBER_DATE_POLICY = 0

meaning always use the message's Date:, and

ARCHIVER_CLOBBER_DATE_POLICY = 1

meaning always use the received date.

The 'future' messages in the mailman-users archive predate this code.
There used to be more of them, but the others are all prior to December
2012.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From mark at msapiro.net  Tue Dec  4 04:39:57 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 19:39:57 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman needs 20 seconds to complete per email
In-Reply-To: <50BCC0BC.9030801@ecologic.eu>
Message-ID: <PC199320121203193957056200ccdc6b@MSAPIRO>

Karsten Becker wrote:

>Oh, seems like it is getting cut... okay, here it is pasted directly
>into the email:


Apparently your MUA is giving the mail log attachment a MIME type other
than text/plain which is a bit surprising as it did give the other 4
files text/plain Content-Type:

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From lstone19 at stonejongleux.com  Tue Dec  4 05:15:13 2012
From: lstone19 at stonejongleux.com (Larry Stone)
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 22:15:13 -0600
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman needs 20 seconds to complete per email
In-Reply-To: <50BD6C76.4010701@msapiro.net>
References: <50B4B7B9.7050303@ecologic.eu>
	<PC19932012112713420101872d0be6bc@MSAPIRO>
	<20121127215641.GC7365@charite.de>
	<CA+XidOFtkSjCgw_M5eApivmxXcU6x3mPOV5-CiVPUQkFQ0ywiw@mail.gmail.com>
	<50BB78B6.7090206@ecologic.eu>
	<20121203061637.GC12019@mail.incertum.net>
	<50BC7099.40607@ecologic.eu>
	<69B87747-A65B-4238-902C-61C1EC4C5A34@stonejongleux.com>
	<50BCA586.70709@ecologic.eu> <50BCC0BC.9030801@ecologic.eu>
	<alpine.OSX.2.00.1212031027160.37378@server-imac.local>
	<50BD6C76.4010701@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <2D35BCE5-B7E7-4E75-B576-562747645462@stonejongleux.com>


On Dec 3, 2012, at 9:22 PM, Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net> wrote:

> 
> 
>>>> Dec 3 09:53:02 mail01 postfix/smtpd[15221]: 0D45F172007D:
>>>> client=localhost[127.0.0.1]
>> 
>> OK, now it's 23 seconds later but we're missing the "connect from" log
>> line from Postfix. At this point, Postfix already has the message as
>> evidenced by the queue-ID (0D45F172007D) in the message. So without
>> seeing when the connect occurred, we don't know if the delay is in
>> Mailman or Postfix.
> 
> 
> Exactly, but I clain the delay is in the SMTP interaction between
> OutgoingRunner and Postfix.

Karsten did send the additional log line showing the connect did not happen until 9:53:02. 

Maybe something is happening that is delaying Postfix in creating the SMTPD process. Maybe a slow DNS response (resolving 127.0.0.1 to localhost)? I'm not sure when Postfix would log the connect message in that case but since it logs the resolved hostname, I'm thinking at the end.


-- 
Larry Stone
lstone19 at stonejongleux.com
http://www.stonejongleux.com/




From mark at msapiro.net  Tue Dec  4 07:03:36 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 22:03:36 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman needs 20 seconds to complete per email
In-Reply-To: <2D35BCE5-B7E7-4E75-B576-562747645462@stonejongleux.com>
Message-ID: <PC1993201212032203360421e94af7c9@MSAPIRO>

Larry Stone wrote:
>
>On Dec 3, 2012, at 9:22 PM, Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net> wrote:
>> 
>> Exactly, but I clain the delay is in the SMTP interaction between
>> OutgoingRunner and Postfix.
>
>Karsten did send the additional log line showing the connect did not happen until 9:53:02. 


I still want to see the smtplib debug output. That will show exactly
where the delay is and allow focus on exactly that step in the SMTP
transaction.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From karsten.becker at ecologic.eu  Tue Dec  4 09:35:48 2012
From: karsten.becker at ecologic.eu (Karsten Becker)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 09:35:48 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman needs 20 seconds to complete per email
In-Reply-To: <PC1993201212032203360421e94af7c9@MSAPIRO>
References: <PC1993201212032203360421e94af7c9@MSAPIRO>
Message-ID: <50BDB5E4.30801@ecologic.eu>

WTF?

> Dec 04 09:25:15 2012 qrunner(8680): connect:   ('localhost', 10030)
> Dec 04 09:25:15 2012 qrunner(8680): connect:   (10030, 'localhost')
> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '220 mail01.foodmz.local ESMTP Ecologic Institute ready\r\n'
> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply: retcode (220); Msg: mail01.foodmz.local ESMTP Foo ready
> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): connect:   mail01.foodmz.local ESMTP Foo ready
> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): send:   'ehlo mail01.foodmz.local\r\n'
> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-mail01.foodmz.local\r\n'
> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-PIPELINING\r\n'
> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-SIZE 20971520\r\n'
> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-ETRN\r\n'
> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-STARTTLS\r\n'
> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-AUTH PLAIN LOGIN\r\n'
> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-AUTH=PLAIN LOGIN\r\n'
> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-XFORWARD NAME ADDR PROTO HELO SOURCE PORT\r\n'
> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES\r\n'
> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-8BITMIME\r\n'
> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250 DSN\r\n'
> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply: retcode (250); Msg: mail01.foodmz.local


What is this f***ing Postfix doing...????

Or is it the mailman searching for localhost all the time? But
"localhost" has an entry in /etc/hosts and /etc/nsswitch.conf looks okay.

Regards
Karsten



On 12/04/2012 07:03 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> Larry Stone wrote:
>>
>> On Dec 3, 2012, at 9:22 PM, Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Exactly, but I clain the delay is in the SMTP interaction between
>>> OutgoingRunner and Postfix.
>>
>> Karsten did send the additional log line showing the connect did not happen until 9:53:02. 
> 
> 
> I still want to see the smtplib debug output. That will show exactly
> where the delay is and allow focus on exactly that step in the SMTP
> transaction.
> 


From grschmidt at acm.org  Tue Dec  4 12:12:19 2012
From: grschmidt at acm.org (Gary R. Schmidt)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 22:12:19 +1100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman needs 20 seconds to complete per email
In-Reply-To: <mailman.60.1354618804.20597.mailman-users@python.org>
References: <mailman.60.1354618804.20597.mailman-users@python.org>
Message-ID: <50BDDA93.3080802@acm.org>

 > Dec 04 09:25:15 2012 qrunner(8680): connect: ('localhost', 10030)
 > Dec 04 09:25:15 2012 qrunner(8680): connect: (10030, 'localhost')
 > Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply: '220 mail01.foodmz.local 
ESMTP Ecologic Institute ready\r\n'

It looks like "localhost" is being gray-listed, or something.

     Cheers,
         Gary    B-)

From stephen at xemacs.org  Tue Dec  4 14:36:59 2012
From: stephen at xemacs.org (Stephen J. Turnbull)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 22:36:59 +0900
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman needs 20 seconds to complete per email
In-Reply-To: <50BDB5E4.30801@ecologic.eu>
References: <PC1993201212032203360421e94af7c9@MSAPIRO>
	<50BDB5E4.30801@ecologic.eu>
Message-ID: <87pq2q2b2c.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>

Karsten Becker writes:
 > WTF?
 > 
 > > Dec 04 09:25:15 2012 qrunner(8680): connect:   ('localhost', 10030)
 > > Dec 04 09:25:15 2012 qrunner(8680): connect:   (10030, 'localhost')
 > > Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '220 mail01.foodmz.local ESMTP Ecologic Institute ready\r\n'
 > > Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply: retcode (220); Msg: mail01.foodmz.local ESMTP Foo ready
 > > Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): connect:   mail01.foodmz.local ESMTP Foo ready
 > > Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): send:   'ehlo mail01.foodmz.local\r\n'
 > > Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-mail01.foodmz.local\r\n'
 > > Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-PIPELINING\r\n'
 > > Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-SIZE 20971520\r\n'
 > > Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-ETRN\r\n'
 > > Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-STARTTLS\r\n'
 > > Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-AUTH PLAIN LOGIN\r\n'
 > > Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-AUTH=PLAIN LOGIN\r\n'
 > > Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-XFORWARD NAME ADDR PROTO HELO SOURCE PORT\r\n'
 > > Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES\r\n'
 > > Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-8BITMIME\r\n'
 > > Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250 DSN\r\n'
 > > Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply: retcode (250); Msg: mail01.foodmz.local
 > 
 > 
 > What is this f***ing Postfix doing...????

This is just a normal handshake.  The two connects at 09:25:15 are
evidently a low-level TCP handshake by the qrunner connecting to the
SMTP server (Postfix, and port 25 is implied) on localhost from port
10030 (localhost is implied for the "from" host).  Why it's listed
twice I don't know; perhaps the first one is the qrunner sending an
initial SYN packet, and the second is the qrunner receiving an ACK
that confirms the connection is established.

The first two replies at 09:25:36 are not really replies: they are
Postfix announcing its presence to the new connection, not a response
to anything the qrunner said.  I have no idea why it takes 21 seconds
for Postfix to make that announcement.

I would guess that the following connect is the qrunner logging the
successful connection, not a new one.  The send, starting with "elho",
is the qrunner identifying itself to Postfix.  Each line starting with
"250" is a status code (250) saying Postfix is happy to talk to
"mail01.foodmz.local", followed by an extended SMTP feature that
Postfix offers over and above the features required by RFC 821 (and
its successors).  The final "reply: retcode" is the qrunner's
interpretation of the preceding gobbledygook, that Postfix is ready to
talk, and accept a message from "mail01".

HTH

Steve

From Ralf.Hildebrandt at charite.de  Tue Dec  4 15:02:35 2012
From: Ralf.Hildebrandt at charite.de (Ralf Hildebrandt)
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 15:02:35 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman needs 20 seconds to complete per email
In-Reply-To: <87pq2q2b2c.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
References: <PC1993201212032203360421e94af7c9@MSAPIRO>
	<50BDB5E4.30801@ecologic.eu>
	<87pq2q2b2c.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <20121204140235.GC21337@charite.de>

* Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen at xemacs.org>:
> Karsten Becker writes:
>  > WTF?
>  > 
>  > > Dec 04 09:25:15 2012 qrunner(8680): connect:   ('localhost', 10030)
>  > > Dec 04 09:25:15 2012 qrunner(8680): connect:   (10030, 'localhost')
>  > > Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '220 mail01.foodmz.local ESMTP Ecologic Institute ready\r\n'

Postfix presents it's banner 20 seconds after the connection has been
established.

Things to try:

* disable chroot for THAT smtpd on port 10030
* check that you have enough instances of that particular smtpd
  (otherwise mailman must wait until one is available)
* check the restrictions for that particular smtpd

-- 
Ralf Hildebrandt                   Charite Universit?tsmedizin Berlin
ralf.hildebrandt at charite.de        Campus Benjamin Franklin
http://www.charite.de              Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin
Gesch?ftsbereich IT, Abt. Netzwerk fon: +49-30-450.570.155

From Ralf.Hildebrandt at charite.de  Tue Dec  4 15:15:42 2012
From: Ralf.Hildebrandt at charite.de (Ralf Hildebrandt)
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 15:15:42 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman needs 20 seconds to complete per email
In-Reply-To: <20121204140235.GC21337@charite.de>
References: <PC1993201212032203360421e94af7c9@MSAPIRO>
	<50BDB5E4.30801@ecologic.eu>
	<87pq2q2b2c.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
	<20121204140235.GC21337@charite.de>
Message-ID: <20121204141542.GD21337@charite.de>

* Ralf Hildebrandt <Ralf.Hildebrandt at charite.de>:
> * Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen at xemacs.org>:
> > Karsten Becker writes:
> >  > WTF?
> >  > 
> >  > > Dec 04 09:25:15 2012 qrunner(8680): connect:   ('localhost', 10030)
> >  > > Dec 04 09:25:15 2012 qrunner(8680): connect:   (10030, 'localhost')
> >  > > Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '220 mail01.foodmz.local ESMTP Ecologic Institute ready\r\n'
> 
> Postfix presents it's banner 20 seconds after the connection has been
> established.
> 
> Things to try:
> 
> * disable chroot for THAT smtpd on port 10030
> * check that you have enough instances of that particular smtpd
>   (otherwise mailman must wait until one is available)
> * check the restrictions for that particular smtpd

* try connecting manually!

-- 
Ralf Hildebrandt                   Charite Universit?tsmedizin Berlin
ralf.hildebrandt at charite.de        Campus Benjamin Franklin
http://www.charite.de              Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin
Gesch?ftsbereich IT, Abt. Netzwerk fon: +49-30-450.570.155

From karsten.becker at ecologic.eu  Tue Dec  4 16:50:23 2012
From: karsten.becker at ecologic.eu (Karsten Becker)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 16:50:23 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman needs 20 seconds to complete per email
In-Reply-To: <20121204141542.GD21337@charite.de>
References: <PC1993201212032203360421e94af7c9@MSAPIRO>
	<50BDB5E4.30801@ecologic.eu>
	<87pq2q2b2c.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
	<20121204140235.GC21337@charite.de>
	<20121204141542.GD21337@charite.de>
Message-ID: <50BE1BBF.3080204@ecologic.eu>

On 12/04/2012 03:15 PM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
>> Postfix presents it's banner 20 seconds after the connection has been
>> established.
>>
>> Things to try:
>>
>> * disable chroot for THAT smtpd on port 10030
>> * check that you have enough instances of that particular smtpd
>>   (otherwise mailman must wait until one is available)
>> * check the restrictions for that particular smtpd
> 
> * try connecting manually!
> 

No, chroot, default number of processes (= 100, far away from that), no
restrictions...

> 127.0.0.1:10030 inet    n       -       -       -       -       smtpd
>         -o smtpd_authorized_xforward_hosts=127.0.0.0/8
>         -o content_filter=
>         -o local_recipient_maps=
>         -o relay_recipient_maps=
>         -o disable_dns_lookups=yes
>         -o smtpd_restriction_classes=
>         -o smtpd_delay_reject=no
>         -o smtpd_client_restrictions=permit_mynetworks,reject
>         -o smtpd_helo_restrictions=
>         -o smtpd_sender_restrictions=
>         -o smtpd_recipient_restrictions=permit_mynetworks,reject
>         -o smtpd_data_restrictions=reject_unauth_pipelining
>         -o smtpd_end_of_data_restrictions=
>         -o mynetworks=127.0.0.0/8
>         -o smtpd_error_sleep_time=0
>         -o smtpd_soft_error_limit=1001
>         -o smtpd_hard_error_limit=1000
>         -o smtpd_client_connection_count_limit=0
>         -o smtpd_client_connection_rate_limit=0
>         -o
receive_override_options=no_header_body_checks,no_unknown_recipient_checks

But... damned - I got it:

> root at mail01.foodmz.local:/var/log/mailman# telnet localhost 10030
> Trying ::1...
> Trying 127.0.0.1...
> Connected to localhost.
> Escape character is '^]'.
> 220 mail01.foodmz.local ESMTP Foo ready

The machine is IPv6 capable, but Postfix is listening to IPv4. As
Mailman is configured in mm_cfg.py to use "localhost" for injecting
back, it gets back "::1" first, tries to connect for 20s, and then falls
back to IPv4, which then succeeds.

So I simply added in my /etc/hosts an entry called localhost-ipv4 for
127.0.0.1 and took that for SMTPHOST in mm_cfg.py.

And, what should I say... like a rocket!

Thanks a lot to all of you for assisting me!!!!

Regards from Berlin/Germany
Karsten


From Ralf.Hildebrandt at charite.de  Tue Dec  4 16:58:48 2012
From: Ralf.Hildebrandt at charite.de (Ralf Hildebrandt)
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 16:58:48 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman needs 20 seconds to complete per email
In-Reply-To: <50BE1BBF.3080204@ecologic.eu>
References: <PC1993201212032203360421e94af7c9@MSAPIRO>
	<50BDB5E4.30801@ecologic.eu>
	<87pq2q2b2c.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
	<20121204140235.GC21337@charite.de>
	<20121204141542.GD21337@charite.de> <50BE1BBF.3080204@ecologic.eu>
Message-ID: <20121204155847.GG21337@charite.de>

* Karsten Becker <karsten.becker at ecologic.eu>:

> No, chroot, default number of processes (= 100, far away from that), no
> restrictions...
> 
> > 127.0.0.1:10030 inet    n       -       -       -       -       smtpd

This one IS chrooted...

> > root at mail01.foodmz.local:/var/log/mailman# telnet localhost 10030
> > Trying ::1...
> > Trying 127.0.0.1...
> > Connected to localhost.
> > Escape character is '^]'.
> > 220 mail01.foodmz.local ESMTP Foo ready
> 
> The machine is IPv6 capable, but Postfix is listening to IPv4. As
> Mailman is configured in mm_cfg.py to use "localhost" for injecting
> back, it gets back "::1" first, tries to connect for 20s, and then falls
> back to IPv4, which then succeeds.

AAAAAH!

> So I simply added in my /etc/hosts an entry called localhost-ipv4 for
> 127.0.0.1 and took that for SMTPHOST in mm_cfg.py.
> 
> And, what should I say... like a rocket!
> 
> Thanks a lot to all of you for assisting me!!!!

-- 
Ralf Hildebrandt                   Charite Universit?tsmedizin Berlin
ralf.hildebrandt at charite.de        Campus Benjamin Franklin
http://www.charite.de              Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin
Gesch?ftsbereich IT, Abt. Netzwerk fon: +49-30-450.570.155

From mark at msapiro.net  Tue Dec  4 19:39:46 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 10:39:46 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman needs 20 seconds to complete per email
In-Reply-To: <50BDB5E4.30801@ecologic.eu>
Message-ID: <PC199320121204103946079629cbe94a@MSAPIRO>

Karsten Becker wrote:
>
>> Dec 04 09:25:15 2012 qrunner(8680): connect:   ('localhost', 10030)


smtplib begins the connect process at 09:25:15


>> Dec 04 09:25:15 2012 qrunner(8680): connect:   (10030, 'localhost')


at 09:25:15 smtplib has established a socket (connection) to port 10030
on localhost. This message indicates the connect was successful and
the socket exists.


>> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '220 mail01.foodmz.local ESMTP Ecologic Institute ready\r\n'


Postfix answers the connect with the above 220 status message at
09:25:36 (21 seconds later). Mailman has been doing nothing but
waiting for this reply from Postfix.


>> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply: retcode (220); Msg: mail01.foodmz.local ESMTP Foo ready


smtplib.getreply() returns the retcode and message to smtplib.connect().


>> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): connect:   mail01.foodmz.local ESMTP Foo ready


smtplib.connect() logs its return to the caller (in this case,
smtplib.sendmail()). The connection is established.


>> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): send:   'ehlo mail01.foodmz.local\r\n'
>> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-mail01.foodmz.local\r\n'
>> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-PIPELINING\r\n'
>> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-SIZE 20971520\r\n'
>> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-ETRN\r\n'
>> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-STARTTLS\r\n'
>> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-AUTH PLAIN LOGIN\r\n'
>> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-AUTH=PLAIN LOGIN\r\n'
>> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-XFORWARD NAME ADDR PROTO HELO SOURCE PORT\r\n'
>> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES\r\n'
>> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250-8BITMIME\r\n'
>> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply:   '250 DSN\r\n'
>> Dec 04 09:25:36 2012 qrunner(8680): reply: retcode (250); Msg: mail01.foodmz.local


smtplib.sendmail() continues with EHLO and gets a reply.


>What is this f***ing Postfix doing...????


It is waiting 21 seconds to answer the connect. What it's doing and why
during that time is a Postfix question, not a Mailman question.


>Or is it the mailman searching for localhost all the time? But
>"localhost" has an entry in /etc/hosts and /etc/nsswitch.conf looks okay.


It is not Mailman. Mailman has established the socket and is waiting
for Postfix to speak. It's Postfix's turn.

What happens if you

telnet localhost 10030

Presumably, it takes 21 seconds before you get a response from Postfix.
That's the delay.

I wrote the above before realizing that others had replied and the
issue was resolved. I'm posting it anyway just for the detailed
interpretation of the smtplib debug messages.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From karsten.becker at ecologic.eu  Tue Dec  4 19:45:36 2012
From: karsten.becker at ecologic.eu (Karsten Becker)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 19:45:36 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman needs 20 seconds to complete per email
In-Reply-To: <PC199320121204103946079629cbe94a@MSAPIRO>
References: <PC199320121204103946079629cbe94a@MSAPIRO>
Message-ID: <50BE44D0.8030906@ecologic.eu>

On 12/04/2012 07:39 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> I wrote the above before realizing that others had replied and the
> issue was resolved. I'm posting it anyway just for the detailed
> interpretation of the smtplib debug messages.

Thanks a lot anyway!

Regards
Karsten


-- 
Karsten Becker
Head of Information Technology

Ecologic Institute
Berlin - Brussels - Vienna - Washington DC

Pfalzburger Strasse 43/44 | 10717 Berlin | Germany
Tel. +49 (30) 86880-137 | Fax +49 (30) 86880-100
http://www.ecologic.eu/ | http://www.ecologic-events.eu/

Ecologic Institute publishes a monthly newsletter.
To subscribe, please register at: http://www.ecologic.eu/subscribe.htm

- - -

Ecologic Institut gemeinnuetzige GmbH
GF/Director: R. Andreas Kraemer | AG Charlottenburg HRB 57947 |
USt/VAT-IdNr. DE811963464
'Ecologic' is a Trade Mark (TM) of Ecologic Institut gemeinnuetzige
GmbH, Berlin.

From mikael.jokela at ursa.fi  Tue Dec  4 20:40:11 2012
From: mikael.jokela at ursa.fi (Mikael Jokela)
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 21:40:11 +0200
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Unable to set defaults for header_filter_rules
Message-ID: <CAH-SThKiSD3zTDsBdVM5PSrFJ2fVitoL0+JJv86GMhxft+ngdw@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Mailman-users!

I would like to set a default value of header_filter_rules for new
lists. It would be something like this

DEFAULT_HEADER_FILTER_RULES = [('X-Spam-Flag: YES', 3, False)]

The purpose would be to discard all messages that are marked as spam.

I can't get this kind of default configuration working nor find any
other way of doing this apart from doing this manually after creating
the list.

Any ideas? I'm using Mailman version 2.1.9 installed from CentOS5 RPM.

Cheers, Mikael

From ncarson at rogers.com  Mon Dec  3 19:00:13 2012
From: ncarson at rogers.com (Neil Carson)
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 13:00:13 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] New to Mailman (and Linux)
Message-ID: <000001cdd180$0b715c10$22541430$@rogers.com>

Hello,

 

I am very new to Linux and Mailman. I have openSUSE 12.2 running on a 'box'
at home and I have Mailman 2.1.14 installed.

I am able to create a test-list either with the web interface or via command
line.  

 

Not certain if Postfix is configured correctly.

 

My home ISP (Rogers.com)  does not allow customers to run a 'mailserver' and
prevents us from doing so by blocking (I believe) certain outgoing/incoming
ports etc.

Is there some way I can get around this  restriction and actually send msgs
to/from my test-list via my home set up (for now)? 

 

My ultimate goal is to replace a 'list server' (Windows based) at my place
of work with Mailman running on SLES11.

 

As stated I am very new to Linux but have many years of computing experience
on `mainframe`, Netware, and Windows and I hope to come up to speed (so to
speak) on Linux in a `timely` manner :) 

 

I have been reading up on Mailman on  http://list.org/  and
http://en.opensuse.org . Are there other good resources out on the web for
Mailman?

 

Any suggestions appreciated. I also apologize asking such `basic` questions.

 

Thank you

Neil.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


From jdanield at free.fr  Tue Dec  4 21:51:28 2012
From: jdanield at free.fr (jdanield)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 21:51:28 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] New to Mailman (and Linux)
In-Reply-To: <000001cdd180$0b715c10$22541430$@rogers.com>
References: <000001cdd180$0b715c10$22541430$@rogers.com>
Message-ID: <50BE6250.6040700@free.fr>

Le 03/12/2012 19:00, Neil Carson a ?crit :

> I have been reading up on Mailman on  http://list.org/  and
> http://en.opensuse.org . Are there other good resources out on the web for
> Mailman?

if you happen to read french, I'm a happy opensuse/mailman user and 
blogged about it

http://dodin.org/wordpress/?cat=3

I can also comment in english

I also have an english page:

http://dodin.org/wiki/index.php?n=Doc.OpenSUSE-small-serverSecondEdition

specially for postfix config

http://dodin.org/wiki/index.php?n=Doc.Postfix-configure-2

all this is extremely openSUSE centered and for a very limited use, I 
setup servers for ten years now, but I'am still  a beginner in many 
respects :-(

jdd


-- 
http://dodin.org

From mark at msapiro.net  Wed Dec  5 00:44:45 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 15:44:45 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Unable to set defaults for header_filter_rules
In-Reply-To: <CAH-SThKiSD3zTDsBdVM5PSrFJ2fVitoL0+JJv86GMhxft+ngdw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <PC1993201212041544450437839333e2@MSAPIRO>

Mikael Jokela wrote:
>
>I would like to set a default value of header_filter_rules for new
>lists. It would be something like this
>
>DEFAULT_HEADER_FILTER_RULES = [('X-Spam-Flag: YES', 3, False)]
>
>The purpose would be to discard all messages that are marked as spam.


header_filter_rules is set to the empty list when a new list is
created. There is no configuration option to do otherwise. To change
this, you could modify the line

        self.header_filter_rules = []

in the definition of the InitVars() method of the MailList() class in
Mailman/MailList.py to read

        self.header_filter_rules = mm_cfg.DEFAULT_HEADER_FILTER_RULES

and then Mailman would get this from a definition in mm_cfg.py or
Defaults.py. Of course, it must then be defined. I.e. a full
implementation would patch the source Defaults.py.in to include

DEFAULT_HEADER_FILTER_RULES = []

and some documentation. This then would add

DEFAULT_HEADER_FILTER_RULES = []

to Defaults.py when Mailman was configured, and then this setting could
be overridden in mm_cfg.py.


>I can't get this kind of default configuration working nor find any
>other way of doing this apart from doing this manually after creating
>the list.


You either need to implement something on the above lines or do it
somewhat manually. You can do it by manually running something like

#!/ban/bash
f = `mktemp`
echo "header_filter_rules = [('X-Spam-Flag: YES', 3, False)]" > $f
/path/to/mailman/bin/config_list -i $f NEW_LIST_NAME
rm $f

after creating NEW_LIST_NAME, or see
<http://www.msapiro.net/scripts/set_attributes>.

If you create lists from the command line, you could make one script to
invoke bin/newlist to create the list followed by the above to
configure it.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From mark at msapiro.net  Wed Dec  5 03:56:11 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 18:56:11 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] New to Mailman (and Linux)
In-Reply-To: <000001cdd180$0b715c10$22541430$@rogers.com>
Message-ID: <PC199320121204185611046823c72bdf@MSAPIRO>

Neil Carson wrote:
>
>My home ISP (Rogers.com)  does not allow customers to run a 'mailserver' and
>prevents us from doing so by blocking (I believe) certain outgoing/incoming
>ports etc.
>
>Is there some way I can get around this  restriction and actually send msgs
>to/from my test-list via my home set up (for now)? 


For testing only, you can just use local addresses that Postfix can
deliver to on the local box. Likewise, you can post from a client on
the local box directly to the local Postfix.

To send mail outside the box you need one of two approaches. The (IMO)
better approach is to configure the local postfix to relay outgoing
mail via your ISP's SMTP server. The other approach is to configure
Mailman to send directly to the ISP's SMTP server using the mm_cfg.py
settings SMTPHOST and SMTPPORT. The reason this is not as good is the
ISP's server most likely requires authentication unless perhaps it
recognizes your connection as part of it's network. If it doesn't
require authentication, then this approach is at least as good as
using Postfix to relay via the ISP. The issue with authentication if
Mailman is delivering directly to the ISP is this requires patching
Mailman. See <https://bugs.launchpad.net/mailman/+bug/558281>. Postfix
can be configured to do the authentication without patching. See
<http://www.postfix.org/SASL_README.html#client_sasl>.

However, keep in mind that while this will enable Mailman to send via
your ISP, the ISP may impose rate limits and other measures that
prevent this from working well or at all with all but a few small, low
volume lists. See also the FAQ at <http://wiki.list.org/x/j4A9>.

The other half of this is delivery of incoming mail to Mailman. If you
can set up lots of addresses with your ISP, you can have every
list at example.com, list-admin at example.com, list-bounces at example.com,
list-confirm at example.com, list-join at example.com,
list-leave at example.com, list-owner at example.com,
list-request at example.com, list-subscribe at example.com and
list-unsubscribe at example.com address go to your ISP and use something
like fetchmail on the local box to get the mail from the ISP and
deliver it to the local Postfix.

See the FAQ at <http://wiki.list.org/x/OwHL> for more on both halfs.


>My ultimate goal is to replace a 'list server' (Windows based) at my place
>of work with Mailman running on SLES11.


It will probably be much more straightforward to do that than to set up
incoming and outgoing Mailman mail via your ISP.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From fernando at thespanishcourse.com  Thu Dec  6 10:51:02 2012
From: fernando at thespanishcourse.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fernando_P=E9rez_Cos?=)
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 10:51:02 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] some messages sent are not archived
Message-ID: <CANHnH5v-v_W1MzCLy5KOxyR8HYqxEK00W4F0_hiy6UA8Ghqggw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

I am a new Mailman user.

Last night, I sent a messages to the mailing list but it didn't seem to
work.

This morning I sent another one and it didn't seem to work either.

None of the messages were in the archive.

Therefore, I changed the privacy options, sender filters. The
member_moderation_action was in "Discard" and I changed it to "Hold".

I sent the message again and I could see it at "Tend to pending moderator
requests". I accepted it and it was sent.

However, it seems that subscribers have received the three messages, even
though, in the archive, there's only one message and not the other three.
Can anyone tell me why this happen and how to avoid itin the future?

Thank you in advance,

Regards,

Fernando.

From mark at msapiro.net  Fri Dec  7 18:10:36 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2012 09:10:36 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] some messages sent are not archived
In-Reply-To: <CANHnH5v-v_W1MzCLy5KOxyR8HYqxEK00W4F0_hiy6UA8Ghqggw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANHnH5v-v_W1MzCLy5KOxyR8HYqxEK00W4F0_hiy6UA8Ghqggw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <50C2230C.2090005@msapiro.net>

On 12/6/2012 1:51 AM, Fernando P?rez Cos wrote:
> 
> Therefore, I changed the privacy options, sender filters. The
> member_moderation_action was in "Discard" and I changed it to "Hold".
> 
> I sent the message again and I could see it at "Tend to pending moderator
> requests". I accepted it and it was sent.
> 
> However, it seems that subscribers have received the three messages, even
> though, in the archive, there's only one message and not the other three.
> Can anyone tell me why this happen and how to avoid itin the future?


Presumably, all the messages were posts from a moderated member and the
first two were discarded and the third held per
member_moderation_action. The held and approved post was archived and
delivered, and the other posts were discarded and not archived.

Everything seems OK except you say that the discarded and not archived
posts were delivered to list members. I don't know how Mailman could
have done this. Can you post the complete headers from one of the posts
as received by a list member?

What's in Mailman's 'vette' and 'post' logs?

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From andrew at hodgsonfamily.org  Fri Dec  7 20:03:39 2012
From: andrew at hodgsonfamily.org (Andrew Hodgson)
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 19:03:39 +0000
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Google Message Security (or similar) with Mailman
Message-ID: <B8CADA170D95C341BD48A77C0D610D983774F834@SHA-EX10-MBX06.exchange.simply.ms>

Hi,

I saw some messages at the beginning of the year on this topic, but not sure if they ever got addressed.  I am looking at going with an email filtering service to protect Mailman traffic, as I am getting a lot of spam addressed to the request addresses which cause backscatter and NDRs bouncing.  My initial concern is regarding quarrentining of list traffic and how this is handled at the Postini end.

Any help greatfully received as always.
Thanks,
Andrew.

From LarryH at Havard.com  Fri Dec  7 21:08:22 2012
From: LarryH at Havard.com (Larry E. Havard)
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 15:08:22 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] FW: Google Message Security (or similar) with
	Mailman
References: <B8CADA170D95C341BD48A77C0D610D983774F834@SHA-EX10-MBX06.exchange.simply.ms>
Message-ID: <005001cdd4b6$9b8dcbb0$d2a96310$@Havard.com>




How big are your list.  
We have 3 list about 100-150 members each and use Canit by penguin software.

We just whitelist each members email address so it is never trapped as spam.

Larry



3075 Charlevoix Dr. S.E.
Grand Rapids, MI 49546
616 458 9333 Voice
616 588 6064 Fax

-----Original Message-----
From: Mailman-Users
[mailto:mailman-users-bounces+larryh=havard.com at python.org] On Behalf Of
Andrew Hodgson
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2012 2:04 PM
To: mailman-users at python.org
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Google Message Security (or similar) with Mailman

Hi,

I saw some messages at the beginning of the year on this topic, but not sure
if they ever got addressed.  I am looking at going with an email filtering
service to protect Mailman traffic, as I am getting a lot of spam addressed
to the request addresses which cause backscatter and NDRs bouncing.  My
initial concern is regarding quarrentining of list traffic and how this is
handled at the Postini end.

Any help greatfully received as always.
Thanks,
Andrew.
------------------------------------------------------
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users at python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy:
http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives:
http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/larryh%40havard.com


--
BEGIN-ANTISPAM-VOTING-LINKS
------------------------------------------------------

Teach CanIt if this mail (ID 03IwHy68r) is spam:
Spam:        http://www.espam.us/canit/b.php?i=03IwHy68r&m=c5b9b9860e57&c=s
Not spam:    http://www.espam.us/canit/b.php?i=03IwHy68r&m=c5b9b9860e57&c=n
Forget vote: http://www.espam.us/canit/b.php?i=03IwHy68r&m=c5b9b9860e57&c=f
------------------------------------------------------
END-ANTISPAM-VOTING-LINKS



From pasqualinic at fcal.uner.edu.ar  Fri Dec  7 21:52:37 2012
From: pasqualinic at fcal.uner.edu.ar (Carlos R. Pasqualini)
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2012 17:52:37 -0300
Subject: [Mailman-Users] reject on max_message_size exceeded
Message-ID: <1354913557.7051.88.camel@capibara.fcal.uner.edu.ar>

Hi

i cannot find any way to reject emails (coming from valid senders) which
exceeded the maximum allowed message size.

mailman currently put them on hold, but i want to instantly reject it
with an alert to the user.

the only thing i found is:
http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users at python.org/msg46813.html

but i don't think that shall be good idea

is there a simple/standard way of configuring this behavior?


thanks!


From mark at msapiro.net  Fri Dec  7 23:05:34 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 14:05:34 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] reject on max_message_size exceeded
In-Reply-To: <1354913557.7051.88.camel@capibara.fcal.uner.edu.ar>
Message-ID: <PC19932012120714053407344e0d7b00@MSAPIRO>


Carlos R. Pasqualini wrote:
>
>i cannot find any way to reject emails (coming from valid senders) which
>exceeded the maximum allowed message size.
>
>mailman currently put them on hold, but i want to instantly reject it
>with an alert to the user.


Then you need to either modify Mailman/Handlers/Hold.py as indicated in
the post you found here


>the only thing i found is:
>http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users at python.org/msg46813.html
>
>but i don't think that shall be good idea


Or you could implement a custom handler <http://wiki.list.org/x/l4A9>
to go in the pipeline prior to Hold which would do this test and
rejection.


>is there a simple/standard way of configuring this behavior?


No.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From mailmanu-20100705 at billmail.scconsult.com  Fri Dec  7 23:25:05 2012
From: mailmanu-20100705 at billmail.scconsult.com (Bill Cole)
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2012 17:25:05 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] reject on max_message_size exceeded
In-Reply-To: <1354913557.7051.88.camel@capibara.fcal.uner.edu.ar>
References: <1354913557.7051.88.camel@capibara.fcal.uner.edu.ar>
Message-ID: <C48AA31F-E9B3-4172-BE3E-32A0A2F3A181@billmail.scconsult.com>

On 7 Dec 2012, at 15:52, Carlos R. Pasqualini wrote:

> Hi
>
> i cannot find any way to reject emails (coming from valid senders) 
> which
> exceeded the maximum allowed message size.
>
> mailman currently put them on hold, but i want to instantly reject it
> with an alert to the user.
>
> the only thing i found is:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users at python.org/msg46813.html
>
> but i don't think that shall be good idea
>
> is there a simple/standard way of configuring this behavior?

Not inside Mailman.

A solution that does not require modifying Mailman code is to put the 
size restrictions in the MTA's configuration instead. Most MTA's support 
global message size limits so if you can live with one limit for all 
lists and all other addresses served by your MTA, you can just set that 
global limit as a fix. If you need more granularity, many mail filtering 
tools that act as adjuncts to an MTA (e.g. amavisd-new, mimedefang, 
etc.) can enforce recipient-specific message size limits before messages 
are accepted by the MTA. If you are already doing strong spam filtering 
there is a good chance that you have the tools you need in place, 
although it may take some work to implement a solution.


From kjohnson at pcc.edu  Fri Dec  7 23:52:40 2012
From: kjohnson at pcc.edu (Kirke Johnson)
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 14:52:40 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Google Message Security (or similar) with
	Mailman
In-Reply-To: <B8CADA170D95C341BD48A77C0D610D983774F834@SHA-EX10-MBX06.exchange.simply.ms>
References: <B8CADA170D95C341BD48A77C0D610D983774F834@SHA-EX10-MBX06.exchange.simply.ms>
Message-ID: <CACWHpAy9zFB33bRtRHX4Cx5Fg-2VGJdTVNWLinrx85+K4gBjww@mail.gmail.com>

We have been using GMS since we migrated user accounts to Gmail. Our
relationship between Postini and Mailman is kind of ugly due to that
migration.

Basically, we set up a Postini org for the Mailman lists which
receives all external mail headed for the lists subdomain. Virus
infected messages and messages for other than the list proper are
refused. Internal mail to lists does not go through Postini, so all
the list aliases can be addressed internally. Clean messages  are
delivered to Mailman. Messages that are quarantined appear in a
nightly quarantine notification message sent to the list owner(s) from
our internal postmaster address, which is an entry in
discard_these_nonmembers in all lists.

Our list owners have been instructed to leave that entry alone. Auto
discards are forwarded to the list owner instead of the list, with the
cryptic subject "Auto-discard notification", which we did not discover
a means of modifying.

List owners have been instructed not to release quarantined messages
to the list unless they are false positives.  List owners can release
messages to the list using either links in the daily notification or
by logging in to the Postini Message Center as the list user (which
requires them to maintain yet another set of account credentials).

Luckily the number of list messages that get quarantined is relatively
low, as this process is difficult to explain and confusing to
recognize when a notification is received. We do not like it, but
could not come up with a better solution given our infrastructure and
the time available during account migration.

I have been instructed to migrate all mailman lists to Google Groups,
and all new lists are being set up as Groups. This will obviously
relieve us of the ugly work-around. We do not yet have enough
experience with Groups to learn what "gotchas" lie in wait for us
there. I would be very interested to hear from anyone who has been
through that migration.

Kirke Johnson                               Internet: kjohnson at pcc.edu
Email Administrator, TSS , Sylvania Campus
Portland Community College, Portland, OR, USA     (971) 722-4368


On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 11:03 AM, Andrew Hodgson
<andrew at hodgsonfamily.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I saw some messages at the beginning of the year on this topic, but not sure if they ever got addressed.  I am looking at going with an email filtering service to protect Mailman traffic, as I am getting a lot of spam addressed to the request addresses which cause backscatter and NDRs bouncing.  My initial concern is regarding quarrentining of list traffic and how this is handled at the Postini end.
>
> Any help greatfully received as always.
> Thanks,
> Andrew.
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
> Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
> Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
> Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
> Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/kjohnson%40pcc.edu

From cigalkan at gmail.com  Sun Dec  9 12:14:19 2012
From: cigalkan at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?G=C3=B6khan_Alkan?=)
Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2012 13:14:19 +0200
Subject: [Mailman-Users] mailman postfix ldap virtual user
Message-ID: <CAF0q29taHcuEiPU5U9SNa-4qmiN3XegYoEOnH=_A+RkE8VRfyA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all

I have searched the list archives but i can't send email to the any mail
list which handled by mailman. User backend is ldap and there is no local
user on the server and there are 4 virtual domains. Postfix
main.cfconfiguration is below and also hostname ise
mail.example.com.

# vi /etc/postfix/main.cf
...
...
mydestination = $myhostname, localhost.$mydomain, localhost
mydomain = example.com
myhostname = mail.example.com

virtual_alias_maps = hash:/etc/mail/aliases,
hash:/usr/local/mailman/data/aliases
virtual_gid_maps = static:501
virtual_mailbox_base = /home/
virtual_mailbox_domains = example.com, example.org
virtual_mailbox_maps = ldap:/etc/postfix/ldap-users.cf
virtual_transport = dovecot
...
...

Mailman mm_cfg.py is below

# vi /usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/mm_cfg.py

MTA = 'Postfix'

DEFAULT_EMAIL_HOST = 'example.com'
DEFAULT_URL_HOST = 'mail.example.com'

VIRTUAL_HOSTS.clear()
add_virtualhost(DEFAULT_URL_HOST, DEFAULT_EMAIL_HOST)

POSTFIX_STYLE_VIRTUAL_DOMAINS = ['example.com']

DEFAULT_URL_PATTERN = 'http://%s/'
PUBLIC_ARCHIVE_URL = 'http://%(hostname)s/archives/%(listname)s'


But when i send to the test at example.com mail list adresses , postfix
returns to me  "unknown user"  and when i look at the postfix log deeper,
it seems

# tail -f /var/log/postfix.log
...
status=bounced (unknown user: "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman post
test at example.com")
...


Best Regards

From ifetch at du.edu  Sun Dec  9 17:14:59 2012
From: ifetch at du.edu (Ivan Fetch)
Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2012 16:14:59 +0000
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Automated Subscription Bots Inundating
 ListOwners With Subscription Requests
In-Reply-To: <50B15417.2080607@msapiro.net>
References: <PC1952012111817090808902f516942@MSAPIRO>
	<50B15417.2080607@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <8F6327842B53A948B0EA7E09DDFE89782403A4@mb2-uts.du.edu>


On Nov 24, 2012, at 4:11 PM, Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net> wrote:

> Mark Sapiro wrote at
> <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/2012-November/074415.html>:
> 
>> I have implemented a simple version of what I think you requested in
>> your post at
>> <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/2012-October/074287.html>.
>> 
>> It is implemented by the attached patch against Mailman 2.1.15.
> 
> 
> I have augmented that patch with a timestamp and it now also checks that
> the hash is no older than mm_cfg.FORM_LIFETIME. See
> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1082746> and
> <http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~mailman-coders/mailman/2.1/revision/1371>
> for a bug report and the patch which will be released with Mailman 2.1.16.



I would like to apply this same patch to a 2.1.14 installation.

I downloaded the three modified files from this patch, and diffed them against 2.1.14 files. It looks like this patch will mostly apply to 2.1.14, but I'm not sure about the differences relating to comparing passwords, and the use of "strip." See 128,129c146,147 in the patch below for the what I am asking about.


Here is my diff:


1c1
< # Copyright (C) 1998-2009 by the Free Software Foundation, Inc.
---
> # Copyright (C) 1998-2012 by the Free Software Foundation, Inc.
22a23
> import time
112c113
<     email = cgidata.getvalue('email', '')
---
>     email = cgidata.getvalue('email', '').strip()
122a124,140
>     # Are we checking the hidden data?
>     if mm_cfg.SUBSCRIBE_FORM_SECRET:
>         now = int(time.time())
>         try:
>             ftime, fhash = cgidata.getvalue('sub_form_token', '').split(':')
>             then = int(ftime)
>         except ValueError:
>             ftime = fhash = ''
>             then = now
>         token = Utils.sha_new(mm_cfg.SUBSCRIBE_FORM_SECRET +
>                               ftime +
>                               mlist.internal_name() +
>                               remote).hexdigest()
>         if now - then > mm_cfg.FORM_LIFETIME:
>             results.append(_('The form is too old.  Please GET it again.'))
>         if token != fhash:
>             results.append(_('You must GET the form before submitting it.'))
128,129c146,147
<     password = cgidata.getvalue('pw')
<     confirmed = cgidata.getvalue('pw-conf')
---
>     password = cgidata.getvalue('pw', '').strip()
>     confirmed = cgidata.getvalue('pw-conf', '').strip()
131c149
<     if password is None and confirmed is None:
---
>     if not password and not confirmed:
133c151
<     elif password is None or confirmed is None:
---
>     elif not password or not confirmed:


From tanstaafl at libertytrek.org  Sun Dec  9 17:32:07 2012
From: tanstaafl at libertytrek.org (Tanstaafl)
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2012 11:32:07 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Google Message Security (or similar) with
	Mailman
In-Reply-To: <CACWHpAy9zFB33bRtRHX4Cx5Fg-2VGJdTVNWLinrx85+K4gBjww@mail.gmail.com>
References: <B8CADA170D95C341BD48A77C0D610D983774F834@SHA-EX10-MBX06.exchange.simply.ms>
	<CACWHpAy9zFB33bRtRHX4Cx5Fg-2VGJdTVNWLinrx85+K4gBjww@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <50C4BD07.7060403@libertytrek.org>

On 2012-12-07 5:52 PM, Kirke Johnson <kjohnson at pcc.edu> wrote:
> We have been using GMS since we migrated user accounts to Gmail. Our
> relationship between Postini and Mailman is kind of ugly due to that
> migration.

Fyi... we have been using postini (hate it, lots of false positives, and 
lots of obvious spam slipping through), and we were told months ago by 
our reseller that Google is discontinuing postini service.

Charles

From mark at msapiro.net  Sun Dec  9 18:11:28 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2012 09:11:28 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Automated Subscription Bots Inundating
 ListOwners With Subscription Requests
In-Reply-To: <8F6327842B53A948B0EA7E09DDFE89782403A4@mb2-uts.du.edu>
References: <PC1952012111817090808902f516942@MSAPIRO>
	<50B15417.2080607@msapiro.net>
	<8F6327842B53A948B0EA7E09DDFE89782403A4@mb2-uts.du.edu>
Message-ID: <50C4C640.2080504@msapiro.net>

On 12/9/2012 8:14 AM, Ivan Fetch wrote:
> 
> I downloaded the three modified files from this patch, and diffed them against 2.1.14 files. It looks like this patch will mostly apply to 2.1.14, but I'm not sure about the differences relating to comparing passwords, and the use of "strip." See 128,129c146,147 in the patch below for the what I am asking about.
> 
> 
> Here is my diff:
> 
[...]
> 112c113
> <     email = cgidata.getvalue('email', '')
> ---
>>     email = cgidata.getvalue('email', '').strip()


The above is the fix for
<https://bugs.launchpad.net/mailman/+bug/745432>. It would be better to
include the .strip() as it fixes the bug.


[...]
> 128,129c146,147
> <     password = cgidata.getvalue('pw')
> <     confirmed = cgidata.getvalue('pw-conf')
> ---
>>     password = cgidata.getvalue('pw', '').strip()
>>     confirmed = cgidata.getvalue('pw-conf', '').strip()
> 131c149
> <     if password is None and confirmed is None:
> ---
>>     if not password and not confirmed:
> 133c151
> <     elif password is None or confirmed is None:
> ---
>>     elif not password or not confirmed:


The above is all part of the fix for
<https://bugs.launchpad.net/mailman/+bug/778088>. The full fix is at
<http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~mailman-coders/mailman/2.1/revision/1303>.

It would be better to include the .strip() as that fixes the bug for the
subscribe form. The other changes at 131 and 133 are important if you
make the changes at 128,129c146,147 because the change from
cgidata.getvalue('..') to cgidata.getvalue('..', '') returns the null
string rather than None if the value is missing.

In other words, it is safe to install the patched 2.1.15 module in
2.1.14. The changes will fix bugs and not break anything.

Or you can apply just the patch to 2.1.14 and continue to live with the
bugs.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From mark at msapiro.net  Sun Dec  9 18:27:58 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2012 09:27:58 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] mailman postfix ldap virtual user
In-Reply-To: <CAF0q29taHcuEiPU5U9SNa-4qmiN3XegYoEOnH=_A+RkE8VRfyA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAF0q29taHcuEiPU5U9SNa-4qmiN3XegYoEOnH=_A+RkE8VRfyA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <50C4CA1E.9030603@msapiro.net>

On 12/9/2012 3:14 AM, G?khan Alkan wrote:
> 
> I have searched the list archives but i can't send email to the any mail
> list which handled by mailman. User backend is ldap and there is no local
> user on the server and there are 4 virtual domains. Postfix
> main.cfconfiguration is below and also hostname ise
> mail.example.com.
> 
> # vi /etc/postfix/main.cf
> ...
> ...
> mydestination = $myhostname, localhost.$mydomain, localhost
> mydomain = example.com
> myhostname = mail.example.com
> 
> virtual_alias_maps = hash:/etc/mail/aliases,
> hash:/usr/local/mailman/data/aliases
> virtual_gid_maps = static:501
> virtual_mailbox_base = /home/
> virtual_mailbox_domains = example.com, example.org
> virtual_mailbox_maps = ldap:/etc/postfix/ldap-users.cf
> virtual_transport = dovecot
> ...
> ...


The output from 'postconf -n' is generally much more useful than
something like the above, however, the above

virtual_alias_maps = hash:/etc/mail/aliases,
  hash:/usr/local/mailman/data/aliases

is wrong. /usr/local/mailman/data/aliases is an alias mapping, not a
virtual_alias mapping. It maps addresses to a pipe which only works with
Postfix's local delivery module.


> Mailman mm_cfg.py is below
> 
> MTA = 'Postfix'
> 
> DEFAULT_EMAIL_HOST = 'example.com'
> DEFAULT_URL_HOST = 'mail.example.com'
> 
> VIRTUAL_HOSTS.clear()
> add_virtualhost(DEFAULT_URL_HOST, DEFAULT_EMAIL_HOST)
> 
> POSTFIX_STYLE_VIRTUAL_DOMAINS = ['example.com']


The above is good, but you should have something like

alias_maps = hash:/etc/mail/aliases,
  hash:/usr/local/mailman/data/aliases

and

virtual_alias_maps = hash:/usr/local/mailman/data/virtual-mailman

in main.cf. See <http://www.list.org/mailman-install/postfix-virtual.html>.


> But when i send to the test at example.com mail list adresses , postfix
> returns to me  "unknown user"  and when i look at the postfix log deeper,
> it seems
> 
> # tail -f /var/log/postfix.log
> ...
> status=bounced (unknown user: "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman post
> test at example.com")
> ...


Because the mapping in /usr/local/mailman/data/aliases when applied as a
virtual_alias mapping says map the virtual address test at example.com to
the local user "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman post test at example.com"
because virtual_alias_maps doesn't understand pipes.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From cigalkan at gmail.com  Sun Dec  9 21:32:03 2012
From: cigalkan at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?G=C3=B6khan_Alkan?=)
Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2012 22:32:03 +0200
Subject: [Mailman-Users] mailman postfix ldap virtual user
In-Reply-To: <50C4CA1E.9030603@msapiro.net>
References: <CAF0q29taHcuEiPU5U9SNa-4qmiN3XegYoEOnH=_A+RkE8VRfyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<50C4CA1E.9030603@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <CAF0q29s-2uFsJuwRD6HJSVaT7vMnfrQKjNve7sriQ28k8gKOxg@mail.gmail.com>

At first thanks for the quick reply.

I see why mailman send mail to "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman post
test at example.com".

Imagine that two domains named example.com and example.org are hosted by
the postfix and i want to create email list named test at example.com.

# postconf -n

alias_maps = hash:/etc/mail/aliases,hash:/usr/local/mailman/data/aliases
broken_sasl_auth_clients = yes
command_directory = /usr/sbin
config_directory = /etc/postfix
daemon_directory = /usr/libexec/postfix
data_directory = /var/lib/postfix
debug_peer_level = 2
disable_vrfy_command = yes
html_directory = no
inet_interfaces = all
inet_protocols = all
mail_owner = postfix
mailbox_size_limit = 1024000000
mailq_path = /usr/bin/mailq.postfix
manpage_directory = /usr/share/man
message_size_limit = 33554432
mydestination = $myhostname, localhost.$mydomain, localhost
mydomain = example.com
myhostname = mail.example.com
mynetworks = 127.0.0.0/8, 192.168.1.0/24
myorigin = $mydomain
newaliases_path = /usr/bin/newaliases.postfix
owner_request_special = no
queue_directory = /var/spool/postfix
readme_directory = /usr/share/doc/postfix-2.6.6/README_FILES
recipient_delimiter = +
relay_domains = $mydestination
sample_directory = /usr/share/doc/postfix-2.6.6/samples
sendmail_path = /usr/sbin/sendmail.postfix
setgid_group = postdrop
smtpd_banner = Email Server
smtpd_client_restrictions = permit_mynetworks, reject
smtpd_delay_reject = yes
smtpd_helo_required = no
smtpd_recipient_restrictions = permit_mynetworks reject_unauth_destination
smtpd_sasl_path = /var/run/dovecot/auth-client
smtpd_sasl_type = dovecot
smtpd_tls_CAfile = /etc/postfix/ssl/certs/ca-bundle.crt
smtpd_tls_CApath = /etc/postfix/ssl/certs/
smtpd_tls_cert_file = /etc/postfix/ssl/certs/server.cer
smtpd_tls_key_file = /etc/postfix/ssl/private/server.key
smtpd_use_tls = yes
syslog_facility = local5
unknown_local_recipient_reject_code = 550
virtual_alias_maps = hash:/usr/local/mailman/data/virtual-mailman
virtual_gid_maps = static:501
virtual_mailbox_base = /home/
virtual_mailbox_domains = $mydomain, example.org
virtual_mailbox_maps = ldap:/etc/postfix/ldap-users.cf
virtual_transport = dovecot
virtual_uid_maps = static:502

-- /usr/local/mailman/data/virtual-mailman file content is below. I'm not
sure what it should be

test at example.com        test


-- Mailman mm_cfg.py is below

MTA = 'Postfix'

DEFAULT_EMAIL_HOST = 'example.com'
DEFAULT_URL_HOST = 'mail.example.com'

VIRTUAL_HOSTS.clear()
add_virtualhost(DEFAULT_URL_HOST, DEFAULT_EMAIL_HOST)

POSTFIX_STYLE_VIRTUAL_DOMAINS = ['example.com', 'example.org']

-- /usr/local/mailman/data/aliases file content is below

## test mailing list
test:              "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman post test"
test-admin:        "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman admin test"
test-bounces:      "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman bounces test"
test-confirm:      "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman confirm test"
test-join:         "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman join test"
test-leave:        "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman leave test"
test-owner:        "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman owner test"
test-request:      "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman request test"
test-subscribe:    "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman subscribe test"
test-unsubscribe:  "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman unsubscribe test"


I think configurations parameters for postfix and mailman are true
but /usr/local/mailman/data/virtual-mailman content is wrong or anything
else. But i dont know what it should be.

Best regards






On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net> wrote:

> On 12/9/2012 3:14 AM, G?khan Alkan wrote:
> >
> > I have searched the list archives but i can't send email to the any mail
> > list which handled by mailman. User backend is ldap and there is no local
> > user on the server and there are 4 virtual domains. Postfix
> > main.cfconfiguration is below and also hostname ise
> > mail.example.com.
> >
> > # vi /etc/postfix/main.cf
> > ...
> > ...
> > mydestination = $myhostname, localhost.$mydomain, localhost
> > mydomain = example.com
> > myhostname = mail.example.com
> >
> > virtual_alias_maps = hash:/etc/mail/aliases,
> > hash:/usr/local/mailman/data/aliases
> > virtual_gid_maps = static:501
> > virtual_mailbox_base = /home/
> > virtual_mailbox_domains = example.com, example.org
> > virtual_mailbox_maps = ldap:/etc/postfix/ldap-users.cf
> > virtual_transport = dovecot
> > ...
> > ...
>
>
> The output from 'postconf -n' is generally much more useful than
> something like the above, however, the above
>
> virtual_alias_maps = hash:/etc/mail/aliases,
>   hash:/usr/local/mailman/data/aliases
>
> is wrong. /usr/local/mailman/data/aliases is an alias mapping, not a
> virtual_alias mapping. It maps addresses to a pipe which only works with
> Postfix's local delivery module.
>
>
> > Mailman mm_cfg.py is below
> >
> > MTA = 'Postfix'
> >
> > DEFAULT_EMAIL_HOST = 'example.com'
> > DEFAULT_URL_HOST = 'mail.example.com'
> >
> > VIRTUAL_HOSTS.clear()
> > add_virtualhost(DEFAULT_URL_HOST, DEFAULT_EMAIL_HOST)
> >
> > POSTFIX_STYLE_VIRTUAL_DOMAINS = ['example.com']
>
>
> The above is good, but you should have something like
>
> alias_maps = hash:/etc/mail/aliases,
>   hash:/usr/local/mailman/data/aliases
>
> and
>
> virtual_alias_maps = hash:/usr/local/mailman/data/virtual-mailman
>
> in main.cf. See <http://www.list.org/mailman-install/postfix-virtual.html
> >.
>
>
> > But when i send to the test at example.com mail list adresses , postfix
> > returns to me  "unknown user"  and when i look at the postfix log deeper,
> > it seems
> >
> > # tail -f /var/log/postfix.log
> > ...
> > status=bounced (unknown user: "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman post
> > test at example.com")
> > ...
>
>
> Because the mapping in /usr/local/mailman/data/aliases when applied as a
> virtual_alias mapping says map the virtual address test at example.com to
> the local user "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman post test at example.com"
> because virtual_alias_maps doesn't understand pipes.
>
> --
> Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
> San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan
>
>


-- 
G?khan ALKAN
------------------------------------------
http://www.linuxakademi.org/
http://www.agguvenligi.net/

From mark at msapiro.net  Sun Dec  9 22:00:46 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2012 13:00:46 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] {Disarmed} Re: mailman postfix ldap virtual user
In-Reply-To: <CAF0q29s-2uFsJuwRD6HJSVaT7vMnfrQKjNve7sriQ28k8gKOxg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAF0q29taHcuEiPU5U9SNa-4qmiN3XegYoEOnH=_A+RkE8VRfyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<50C4CA1E.9030603@msapiro.net>
	<CAF0q29s-2uFsJuwRD6HJSVaT7vMnfrQKjNve7sriQ28k8gKOxg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <50C4FBFE.6020204@msapiro.net>

On 12/9/2012 12:32 PM, G?khan Alkan wrote:
> 
> Imagine that two domains named example.com and example.org are hosted by
> the postfix and i want to create email list named test at example.com.


That's fine as long as list names are globally unique. I.e., you can't
have two different lists named 'test' even if they are in different domains.


> # postconf -n
> 
> alias_maps = hash:/etc/mail/aliases,hash:/usr/local/mailman/data/aliases
> broken_sasl_auth_clients = yes
> command_directory = /usr/sbin
> config_directory = /etc/postfix
> daemon_directory = /usr/libexec/postfix
> data_directory = /var/lib/postfix
> debug_peer_level = 2
> disable_vrfy_command = yes
> html_directory = no
> inet_interfaces = all
> inet_protocols = all
> mail_owner = postfix
> mailbox_size_limit = 1024000000
> mailq_path = /usr/bin/mailq.postfix
> manpage_directory = /usr/share/man
> message_size_limit = 33554432
> mydestination = $myhostname, localhost.$mydomain, localhost
> mydomain = example.com
> myhostname = mail.example.com
> mynetworks = 127.0.0.0/8, 192.168.1.0/24
> myorigin = $mydomain
> newaliases_path = /usr/bin/newaliases.postfix
> owner_request_special = no
> queue_directory = /var/spool/postfix
> readme_directory = /usr/share/doc/postfix-2.6.6/README_FILES
> recipient_delimiter = +
> relay_domains = $mydestination
> sample_directory = /usr/share/doc/postfix-2.6.6/samples
> sendmail_path = /usr/sbin/sendmail.postfix
> setgid_group = postdrop
> smtpd_banner = Email Server
> smtpd_client_restrictions = permit_mynetworks, reject
> smtpd_delay_reject = yes
> smtpd_helo_required = no
> smtpd_recipient_restrictions = permit_mynetworks reject_unauth_destination
> smtpd_sasl_path = /var/run/dovecot/auth-client
> smtpd_sasl_type = dovecot
> smtpd_tls_CAfile = /etc/postfix/ssl/certs/ca-bundle.crt
> smtpd_tls_CApath = /etc/postfix/ssl/certs/
> smtpd_tls_cert_file = /etc/postfix/ssl/certs/server.cer
> smtpd_tls_key_file = /etc/postfix/ssl/private/server.key
> smtpd_use_tls = yes
> syslog_facility = local5
> unknown_local_recipient_reject_code = 550
> virtual_alias_maps = hash:/usr/local/mailman/data/virtual-mailman
> virtual_gid_maps = static:501
> virtual_mailbox_base = /home/
> virtual_mailbox_domains = $mydomain, example.org
> virtual_mailbox_maps = ldap:/etc/postfix/ldap-users.cf
> virtual_transport = dovecot
> virtual_uid_maps = static:502
> 
> -- /usr/local/mailman/data/virtual-mailman file content is below. I'm not
> sure what it should be
> 
> test at example.com        test


That's right. It should map the virtual domain address test at example.com
to the local address 'test' which is then aliased to
"|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman post test".

There should also be 9 more entries like

test-admin at example.com    test-admin
test-bounces at example.com    test-bounces
test-confirm at example.com    test-confirm
test-join at example.com    test-join
test-leave at example.com    test-leave
test-owner at example.com    test-owner
test-request at example.com    test-request
test-subscribe at example.com    test-subscribe
test-unsubscribe at example.com    test-unsubscribe



> -- Mailman mm_cfg.py is below
> 
> MTA = 'Postfix'
> 
> DEFAULT_EMAIL_HOST = 'example.com'
> DEFAULT_URL_HOST = 'mail.example.com'
> 
> VIRTUAL_HOSTS.clear()
> add_virtualhost(DEFAULT_URL_HOST, DEFAULT_EMAIL_HOST)


You also want

add_virtualhost('web.domain.for.example.org', 'example.org')

web.domain.for.example.org must be different from mail.example.com


> POSTFIX_STYLE_VIRTUAL_DOMAINS = ['example.com', 'example.org']
> 
> -- /usr/local/mailman/data/aliases file content is below
> 
> ## test mailing list
> test:              "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman post test"
> test-admin:        "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman admin test"
> test-bounces:      "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman bounces test"
> test-confirm:      "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman confirm test"
> test-join:         "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman join test"
> test-leave:        "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman leave test"
> test-owner:        "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman owner test"
> test-request:      "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman request test"
> test-subscribe:    "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman subscribe test"
> test-unsubscribe:  "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman unsubscribe test"


OK


> I think configurations parameters for postfix and mailman are true
> but /usr/local/mailman/data/virtual-mailman content is wrong or anything
> else. But i dont know what it should be.


Why do you think it's wrong? Do you have a problem with mail delivery to
test at example.com? If so, what is the problem and what are the Postfix
log messages?


-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From cigalkan at gmail.com  Sun Dec  9 22:12:27 2012
From: cigalkan at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?G=C3=B6khan_Alkan?=)
Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2012 23:12:27 +0200
Subject: [Mailman-Users] {Disarmed} Re: mailman postfix ldap virtual user
In-Reply-To: <50C4FBFE.6020204@msapiro.net>
References: <CAF0q29taHcuEiPU5U9SNa-4qmiN3XegYoEOnH=_A+RkE8VRfyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<50C4CA1E.9030603@msapiro.net>
	<CAF0q29s-2uFsJuwRD6HJSVaT7vMnfrQKjNve7sriQ28k8gKOxg@mail.gmail.com>
	<50C4FBFE.6020204@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <CAF0q29v=xthMFnTvUavKwF4T92fN+icrhBDspyYR3VqNevG00w@mail.gmail.com>

Hi

Now /usr/local/mailman/data/virtual-mailman file content is below.

test at example.com              test
test-admin at example.com    test-admin
test-bounces at example.com    test-bounces
test-confirm at example.com    test-confirm
test-join at example.com    test-join
test-leave at example.com    test-leave
test-owner at example.com    test-owner
test-request at example.com    test-request
test-subscribe at example.com    test-subscribe
test-unsubscribe at example.com    test-unsubscribe

But when i want to send email to test at example.com, postfix returns
"tatus=bounced (unknown user: "test at example.com")"

Actually, i expect postfix to send mail to mailman because of the " test:
           "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman post test" " line in
the /usr/local/mailman/data/aliases file . And also main.cf file contains
the line  "alias_maps =
hash:/etc/mail/aliases,hash:/usr/local/mailman/data/aliases". But it doesnt
run and returns "unknwon user".

Best regards


On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 11:00 PM, Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net> wrote:

> > -- /usr/local/mailman/data/virtual-mailman file content is below. I'm not
> > sure what it should be
> >
> > test at example.com        test
>
>
> That's right. It should map the virtual domain address test at example.com
> to the local address 'test' which is then aliased to
> "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman post test".
>
> There should also be 9 more entries like
>
> test-admin at example.com    test-admin
> test-bounces at example.com    test-bounces
> test-confirm at example.com    test-confirm
> test-join at example.com    test-join
> test-leave at example.com    test-leave
> test-owner at example.com    test-owner
> test-request at example.com    test-request
> test-subscribe at example.com    test-subscribe
> test-unsubscribe at example.com    test-unsubscribe
>



-- 
G?khan ALKAN
------------------------------------------
http://www.linuxakademi.org/
http://www.agguvenligi.net/

From mark at msapiro.net  Sun Dec  9 23:52:52 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2012 14:52:52 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] {Disarmed} Re: mailman postfix ldap virtual user
In-Reply-To: <CAF0q29v=xthMFnTvUavKwF4T92fN+icrhBDspyYR3VqNevG00w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAF0q29taHcuEiPU5U9SNa-4qmiN3XegYoEOnH=_A+RkE8VRfyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<50C4CA1E.9030603@msapiro.net>
	<CAF0q29s-2uFsJuwRD6HJSVaT7vMnfrQKjNve7sriQ28k8gKOxg@mail.gmail.com>
	<50C4FBFE.6020204@msapiro.net>
	<CAF0q29v=xthMFnTvUavKwF4T92fN+icrhBDspyYR3VqNevG00w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <50C51644.3000009@msapiro.net>

On 12/9/2012 1:12 PM, G?khan Alkan wrote:
> 
> But when i want to send email to test at example.com, postfix returns
> "tatus=bounced (unknown user: "test at example.com")"


What is the full log message?

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From stephen at xemacs.org  Mon Dec 10 03:13:28 2012
From: stephen at xemacs.org (Stephen J. Turnbull)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 11:13:28 +0900
Subject: [Mailman-Users] {Disarmed} Re: mailman postfix ldap virtual user
In-Reply-To: <CAF0q29v=xthMFnTvUavKwF4T92fN+icrhBDspyYR3VqNevG00w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAF0q29taHcuEiPU5U9SNa-4qmiN3XegYoEOnH=_A+RkE8VRfyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<50C4CA1E.9030603@msapiro.net>
	<CAF0q29s-2uFsJuwRD6HJSVaT7vMnfrQKjNve7sriQ28k8gKOxg@mail.gmail.com>
	<50C4FBFE.6020204@msapiro.net>
	<CAF0q29v=xthMFnTvUavKwF4T92fN+icrhBDspyYR3VqNevG00w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <87sj7e1won.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>

G?khan Alkan writes:

 > the /usr/local/mailman/data/aliases file . And also main.cf file contains
 > the line  "alias_maps =
 > hash:/etc/mail/aliases,hash:/usr/local/mailman/data/aliases". But it doesnt
 > run and returns "unknwon user".

As a wild guess, I bet Postfix also wants to be informed about
virtual users with a line like:

    virtual_maps = hash:/usr/local/mailman/data/virtual-mailman

How is Postfix told to look in that file for virtual users?  If
you haven't configured that, I expect your problem and solution is
somewhere in that neighborhood.

Warning: I'm a postfix user, but a very happy one -- I never have such
problems.  So I'm just guessing.<wink/>

From cigalkan at gmail.com  Mon Dec 10 07:38:47 2012
From: cigalkan at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?G=C3=B6khan_Alkan?=)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 08:38:47 +0200
Subject: [Mailman-Users] {Disarmed} Re: mailman postfix ldap virtual user
In-Reply-To: <50C51644.3000009@msapiro.net>
References: <CAF0q29taHcuEiPU5U9SNa-4qmiN3XegYoEOnH=_A+RkE8VRfyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<50C4CA1E.9030603@msapiro.net>
	<CAF0q29s-2uFsJuwRD6HJSVaT7vMnfrQKjNve7sriQ28k8gKOxg@mail.gmail.com>
	<50C4FBFE.6020204@msapiro.net>
	<CAF0q29v=xthMFnTvUavKwF4T92fN+icrhBDspyYR3VqNevG00w@mail.gmail.com>
	<50C51644.3000009@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <CAF0q29uhkrNxh6wuWfCSBKiPpJ-gwf-gV7BoH2yzpJ4BFifiGA@mail.gmail.com>

Here is the postfix log .

Dec 10 08:33:51 mail postfix/cleanup[19869]: 9BD343FEC3: message-id=<
c5fda5032ab9f35756783b6fd9095dd5 at webmail.example.com>
Dec 10 08:33:51 mail postfix/smtpd[19865]: disconnect from
unknown[192.168.1.2]
Dec 10 08:33:51 mail postfix/qmgr[19850]: 9BD343FEC3: from=<
deneme at example.com>, size=1376, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
Dec 10 08:33:51 mail postfix/pipe[19870]: 9BD343FEC3: to=<test at example.com>,
relay=dovecot, delay=0.04, delays=0/0/0/0.03, dsn=5.1.1, status=bounced
(user unknown)
Dec 10 08:33:51 mail postfix/cleanup[19869]: A533040B47: message-id=<
20121210063351.A533040B47 at mail.example.com>
Dec 10 08:33:51 mail postfix/bounce[19878]: 9BD343FEC3: sender non-delivery
notification: A533040B47
Dec 10 08:33:51 mail postfix/qmgr[19850]: A533040B47: from=<>, size=3204,
nrcpt=1 (queue active)
Dec 10 08:33:51 mail postfix/qmgr[19850]: 9BD343FEC3: removed
Dec 10 08:33:51 mail postfix/pipe[19870]: A533040B47: to=<deneme at example.com>,
relay=dovecot, delay=0.04, delays=0/0/0/0.03, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent
(delivered via dovecot service)
Dec 10 08:33:51 mail postfix/qmgr[19850]: A533040B47: removed

Best regards

From cigalkan at gmail.com  Mon Dec 10 08:03:01 2012
From: cigalkan at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?G=C3=B6khan_Alkan?=)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 09:03:01 +0200
Subject: [Mailman-Users] {Disarmed} Re: mailman postfix ldap virtual user
In-Reply-To: <87sj7e1won.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
References: <CAF0q29taHcuEiPU5U9SNa-4qmiN3XegYoEOnH=_A+RkE8VRfyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<50C4CA1E.9030603@msapiro.net>
	<CAF0q29s-2uFsJuwRD6HJSVaT7vMnfrQKjNve7sriQ28k8gKOxg@mail.gmail.com>
	<50C4FBFE.6020204@msapiro.net>
	<CAF0q29v=xthMFnTvUavKwF4T92fN+icrhBDspyYR3VqNevG00w@mail.gmail.com>
	<87sj7e1won.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <CAF0q29vi=g5rBASXeQAQOeM6QR2P-OtX3Pso6JXfwUOUypcWUA@mail.gmail.com>

hostname is mail.example.com

-- main.cf

mydestination = $myhostname, localhost.$mydomain, localhost
mydomain = example.com
myhostname = mail.example.com
mynetworks = 127.0.0.0/8, 192.168.1.0/24
myorigin = $mydomain
relay_domains = $mydestination
sendmail_path = /usr/sbin/sendmail.postfix
setgid_group = postdrop
smtpd_client_restrictions = permit_mynetworks, reject
smtpd_delay_reject = yes
smtpd_helo_required = no
smtpd_recipient_restrictions = permit_mynetworks reject_unauth_destination
smtpd_sasl_path = /var/run/dovecot/auth-client
smtpd_sasl_type = dovecot
unknown_local_recipient_reject_code = 550

alias_maps = hash:/etc/mail/aliases, hash:/usr/local/mailman/data/aliases
alias_database = hash:/etc/mail/aliases,
hash:/usr/local/mailman/data/aliases

virtual_alias_maps = hash:/usr/local/mailman/data/virtual-mailman
recipient_delimiter = +

virtual_gid_maps = static:501
virtual_mailbox_base = /home/
virtual_mailbox_domains = $mydomain, example.org
virtual_mailbox_maps = ldap:/etc/postfix/ldap-users.cf
virtual_transport = dovecot
virtual_uid_maps = static:502

-- master.cf

smtp      inet  n       -       n       -       -       smtpd
pickup    fifo  n       -       n       60      1       pickup
cleanup   unix  n       -       n       -       0       cleanup
qmgr      fifo  n       -       n       300     1       qmgr
tlsmgr    unix  -       -       n       1000?   1       tlsmgr
rewrite   unix  -       -       n       -       -       trivial-rewrite
bounce    unix  -       -       n       -       0       bounce
defer     unix  -       -       n       -       0       bounce
trace     unix  -       -       n       -       0       bounce
verify    unix  -       -       n       -       1       verify
flush     unix  n       -       n       1000?   0       flush
proxymap  unix  -       -       n       -       -       proxymap
proxywrite unix -       -       n       -       1       proxymap
smtp      unix  -       -       n       -       -       smtp
relay     unix  -       -       n       -       -       smtp
-o smtp_fallback_relay=
showq     unix  n       -       n       -       -       showq
error     unix  -       -       n       -       -       error
retry     unix  -       -       n       -       -       error
discard   unix  -       -       n       -       -       discard
local     unix  -       n       n       -       -       local
virtual   unix  -       n       n       -       -       virtual
lmtp      unix  -       -       n       -       -       lmtp
anvil     unix  -       -       n       -       1       anvil
scache    unix  -       -       n       -       1       scache
dovecot   unix  -       n       n       -       -       pipe
flags=DRhu user=vmail:vmail argv=/usr/libexec/dovecot/deliver -d ${user}


-- /usr/local/mailman/data/aliases

test at example.com test
test-admin at example.com    test-admin
test-bounces at example.com    test-bounces
test-confirm at example.com    test-confirm
test-join at example.com    test-join
test-leave at example.com    test-leave
test-owner at example.com    test-owner
test-request at example.com    test-request
test-subscribe at example.com    test-subscribe
test-unsubscribe at example.com    test-unsubscribe



-- /usr/local/mailman/data/virtual-mailman

test:              "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman post test"
test-admin:        "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman admin test"
test-bounces:      "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman bounces test"
test-confirm:      "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman confirm test"
test-join:         "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman join test"
test-leave:        "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman leave test"
test-owner:        "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman owner test"
test-request:      "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman request test"
test-subscribe:    "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman subscribe test"
test-unsubscribe:  "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman unsubscribe test"
-- /usr/lib/mailman/Mailman/mm_cfg.py

MTA = 'Postfix'

DEFAULT_EMAIL_HOST = 'example.com'
DEFAULT_URL_HOST = 'mail.example.com'

VIRTUAL_HOSTS.clear()
add_virtualhost(DEFAULT_URL_HOST, DEFAULT_EMAIL_HOST)

POSTFIX_STYLE_VIRTUAL_DOMAINS = ['example.com','example.org']

DEFAULT_URL_PATTERN = 'http://%s/'
PUBLIC_ARCHIVE_URL = 'http://%(hostname)s/archives/%(listname)s'

But when i sent to email to the test at example.com, postfix returns "unkonown
user"

...
Dec 10 08:33:51 mail postfix/pipe[19870]: 9BD343FEC3: to=<test at example.com>,
relay=dovecot, delay=0.04, delays=0/0/0/0.03, dsn=5.1.1, status=bounced
(user unknown)
...


Why postfix doesn't use alias_maps when virtual_alias_maps directive is
used ? I dont exactly what the problem is.

Best regards

From stephen at xemacs.org  Mon Dec 10 09:54:27 2012
From: stephen at xemacs.org (Stephen J. Turnbull)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 17:54:27 +0900
Subject: [Mailman-Users] {Disarmed} Re: mailman postfix ldap virtual user
In-Reply-To: <CAF0q29vi=g5rBASXeQAQOeM6QR2P-OtX3Pso6JXfwUOUypcWUA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAF0q29taHcuEiPU5U9SNa-4qmiN3XegYoEOnH=_A+RkE8VRfyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<50C4CA1E.9030603@msapiro.net>
	<CAF0q29s-2uFsJuwRD6HJSVaT7vMnfrQKjNve7sriQ28k8gKOxg@mail.gmail.com>
	<50C4FBFE.6020204@msapiro.net>
	<CAF0q29v=xthMFnTvUavKwF4T92fN+icrhBDspyYR3VqNevG00w@mail.gmail.com>
	<87sj7e1won.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
	<CAF0q29vi=g5rBASXeQAQOeM6QR2P-OtX3Pso6JXfwUOUypcWUA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <87pq2i1e4c.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>

G?khan Alkan writes:

 > virtual_alias_maps = hash:/usr/local/mailman/data/virtual-mailman
 > virtual_transport = dovecot
 > dovecot   unix  -       n       n       -       -       pipe flags=DRhu user=vmail:vmail argv=/usr/libexec/dovecot/deliver -d ${user}

It looks to me like your mailman aliases will be handed to
dovecot/deliver.  Does dovecot/deliver know about Mailman?



From cigalkan at gmail.com  Mon Dec 10 10:00:10 2012
From: cigalkan at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?G=C3=B6khan_Alkan?=)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 11:00:10 +0200
Subject: [Mailman-Users] {Disarmed} Re: mailman postfix ldap virtual user
In-Reply-To: <87pq2i1e4c.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
References: <CAF0q29taHcuEiPU5U9SNa-4qmiN3XegYoEOnH=_A+RkE8VRfyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<50C4CA1E.9030603@msapiro.net>
	<CAF0q29s-2uFsJuwRD6HJSVaT7vMnfrQKjNve7sriQ28k8gKOxg@mail.gmail.com>
	<50C4FBFE.6020204@msapiro.net>
	<CAF0q29v=xthMFnTvUavKwF4T92fN+icrhBDspyYR3VqNevG00w@mail.gmail.com>
	<87sj7e1won.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
	<CAF0q29vi=g5rBASXeQAQOeM6QR2P-OtX3Pso6JXfwUOUypcWUA@mail.gmail.com>
	<87pq2i1e4c.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <CAF0q29uK-fZruWLj9DjCxZgd6H0L=bZpxw_zFmFGfa_68F8QRw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi

Actually, there is no configuration for mailman in dovecot.conf. But how
can dovecot handle mailman alias?

Best regards

On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen at xemacs.org>wrote:

> G?khan Alkan writes:
>
>  > virtual_alias_maps = hash:/usr/local/mailman/data/virtual-mailman
>  > virtual_transport = dovecot
>  > dovecot   unix  -       n       n       -       -       pipe flags=DRhu
> user=vmail:vmail argv=/usr/libexec/dovecot/deliver -d ${user}
>
> It looks to me like your mailman aliases will be handed to
> dovecot/deliver.  Does dovecot/deliver know about Mailman?
>
>
>


-- 
G?khan ALKAN
------------------------------------------
http://www.linuxakademi.org/
http://www.agguvenligi.net/

From cigalkan at gmail.com  Mon Dec 10 10:21:22 2012
From: cigalkan at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?G=C3=B6khan_Alkan?=)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 11:21:22 +0200
Subject: [Mailman-Users] {Disarmed} Re: mailman postfix ldap virtual user
In-Reply-To: <CAF0q29uK-fZruWLj9DjCxZgd6H0L=bZpxw_zFmFGfa_68F8QRw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAF0q29taHcuEiPU5U9SNa-4qmiN3XegYoEOnH=_A+RkE8VRfyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<50C4CA1E.9030603@msapiro.net>
	<CAF0q29s-2uFsJuwRD6HJSVaT7vMnfrQKjNve7sriQ28k8gKOxg@mail.gmail.com>
	<50C4FBFE.6020204@msapiro.net>
	<CAF0q29v=xthMFnTvUavKwF4T92fN+icrhBDspyYR3VqNevG00w@mail.gmail.com>
	<87sj7e1won.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
	<CAF0q29vi=g5rBASXeQAQOeM6QR2P-OtX3Pso6JXfwUOUypcWUA@mail.gmail.com>
	<87pq2i1e4c.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
	<CAF0q29uK-fZruWLj9DjCxZgd6H0L=bZpxw_zFmFGfa_68F8QRw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAF0q29ut+XMkiSYFwsfXThNSU4gdhnk8BOjdJp+iVNOkbwy3HA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi

I uncomment the dovecot line in master.cf and virtual_transport = dovecot.
But it doesn't work, Why postfix doesn't handle alias_maps when the email
is delivered to virtual domains ?

Best regards

On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 11:00 AM, G?khan Alkan <cigalkan at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi
>
> Actually, there is no configuration for mailman in dovecot.conf. But how
> can dovecot handle mailman alias?
>
> Best regards
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen at xemacs.org>wrote:
>
>> G?khan Alkan writes:
>>
>>  > virtual_alias_maps = hash:/usr/local/mailman/data/virtual-mailman
>>  > virtual_transport = dovecot
>>  > dovecot   unix  -       n       n       -       -       pipe
>> flags=DRhu user=vmail:vmail argv=/usr/libexec/dovecot/deliver -d ${user}
>>
>> It looks to me like your mailman aliases will be handed to
>> dovecot/deliver.  Does dovecot/deliver know about Mailman?
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> G?khan ALKAN
> ------------------------------------------
> http://www.linuxakademi.org/
> http://www.agguvenligi.net/
>
>


-- 
G?khan ALKAN
------------------------------------------
http://www.linuxakademi.org/
http://www.agguvenligi.net/

From geoff at QuiteLikely.com  Mon Dec 10 11:19:26 2012
From: geoff at QuiteLikely.com (Geoff Shang)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 12:19:26 +0200 (IST)
Subject: [Mailman-Users] {Disarmed} Re: mailman postfix ldap virtual user
In-Reply-To: <CAF0q29ut+XMkiSYFwsfXThNSU4gdhnk8BOjdJp+iVNOkbwy3HA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAF0q29taHcuEiPU5U9SNa-4qmiN3XegYoEOnH=_A+RkE8VRfyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<50C4CA1E.9030603@msapiro.net>
	<CAF0q29s-2uFsJuwRD6HJSVaT7vMnfrQKjNve7sriQ28k8gKOxg@mail.gmail.com>
	<50C4FBFE.6020204@msapiro.net>
	<CAF0q29v=xthMFnTvUavKwF4T92fN+icrhBDspyYR3VqNevG00w@mail.gmail.com>
	<87sj7e1won.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
	<CAF0q29vi=g5rBASXeQAQOeM6QR2P-OtX3Pso6JXfwUOUypcWUA@mail.gmail.com>
	<87pq2i1e4c.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
	<CAF0q29uK-fZruWLj9DjCxZgd6H0L=bZpxw_zFmFGfa_68F8QRw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAF0q29ut+XMkiSYFwsfXThNSU4gdhnk8BOjdJp+iVNOkbwy3HA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1212101206590.3030@data.home>

On Mon, 10 Dec 2012, G?khan Alkan wrote:

> I uncomment the dovecot line in master.cf and virtual_transport = dovecot.
> But it doesn't work, Why postfix doesn't handle alias_maps when the email
> is delivered to virtual domains ?

Do you have your domain in either virtual_alias_domains or 
virtual_mailbox_domains, or mentioned in a file/resource pointed at by 
either virtual_alias_maps or virtual_mailbox_maps?

If Postfix doesn't think your domain is virtual, it won't look in 
virtual_alias_maps for the address.

The config you recently posted seemed a bit mixed up, with hosts/domains 
mentioned in multiple configuration variables.  As a general rule, a 
domain should only be mentioned once in any of mydestinations 
(locally-deliverable mail), virtual_*_domains (other hosted domains that 
are not local) and relay_domains (domains you relay somewhere else).

I think that perhaps you don't have a clear understanding of Postfix 
address classes and what each is used for.  I recommend reading 
http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_CLASS_README.html

If your Mailman domain has no mailboxes, you can put it in either 
virtual_alias_domains or in a virtual_alias_maps file.  If you want 
mailboxes too, use the virtual_mailbox_* equivalents (I use this for 
everything personally).

HTH,
Geoff.

From Jan at vic-fontaine.com  Sun Dec  9 18:50:08 2012
From: Jan at vic-fontaine.com (Jan Krohn)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 00:50:08 +0700
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Digest growing to infinity
Message-ID: <000301cdd635$a64c2030$f2e46090$@vic-fontaine.com>

Dear All,

 

I'm new to this list, but I've been using mailman for many years.

For a new project, I created seven identical lists (identical configuration)
in seven different languages, all running on Mailman 2.1.15. This works fine
for 6 lists.

The Japanese list however is behaving extremely strange. I'm not sure
whether this is a bug or misconfiguration on my side.

 

The digest being sent out is the same one every day, and the new posts are
just appended to it. So the daily digest is growing and growing and growing.
(Just to clarify: I have not subscribed the mailing list address itself to
the list! :)

 

I'm on shared hosting, so I haven't got full access to all files. But maybe
someone here knows how to get it right. If it helps, my lists are accessible
here: http://heidoc.net/mailman/listinfo

 

Thanks and best wishes,

Jan


From stephen at xemacs.org  Mon Dec 10 14:32:52 2012
From: stephen at xemacs.org (Stephen J. Turnbull)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 22:32:52 +0900
Subject: [Mailman-Users]  Digest growing to infinity
In-Reply-To: <000301cdd635$a64c2030$f2e46090$@vic-fontaine.com>
References: <000301cdd635$a64c2030$f2e46090$@vic-fontaine.com>
Message-ID: <87mwxm118b.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>

Jan Krohn writes:

 > The Japanese list however is behaving extremely strange. I'm not sure
 > whether this is a bug or misconfiguration on my side.

It's not due to it being Japanese.  I've run Japanese lists for years
with no such effect.

 > The digest being sent out is the same one every day, and the new posts are
 > just appended to it.

That's incorrect, and it sounds like the digest file is not being
deleted properly.  Deleting a file requires write access to the
containing directory, not to the file, so it's possible for the file
to be appendable but not deletable.

Ask the host to run Mailman's check_perms script.

From tom.browder at gmail.com  Mon Dec 10 14:59:03 2012
From: tom.browder at gmail.com (Tom Browder)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 07:59:03 -0600
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Filtering Mail with Regexes: Possible?
Message-ID: <CAFMGiz911qr3twwOSL+y8sr=PetH5QbM8MafVTBLT0fhpRGMTQ@mail.gmail.com>

I would like to be able to filter message bodies and put a hold for
approval on those with html links in them to try to catch address book
hijacked mail (mail sent to a list of addresses stolen from
subscribers' contact lists).

Is that possible?

Best regards,

-Tom

From fmouse-mailman at fmp.com  Mon Dec 10 22:41:14 2012
From: fmouse-mailman at fmp.com (Lindsay Haisley)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 15:41:14 -0600
Subject: [Mailman-Users] A quick couple of questions regarding "From",
	"Sender" and Gmail
Message-ID: <1355175674.53063.92.camel@pudina.fmp.com>

I'm trying to reply to a comment from a Mailman list subscriber on a
list I manage, and have a couple of questions which someone might be
able to answer quickly, or post me a link, much faster than I can
research the matter.

At what header fields an an email (From, Sender, Reply-to) does Mailman
2.1.15 look when determining if an email is from a list subscriber and
what's the algorithm it uses, if other than a simple OR of the
addresses?

What are the known issues with Gmail and Mailman, especially those which
might result in an email being silently dropped on the floor?  A
reference to an existing thread or article would be helpful.

-- 
Lindsay Haisley       |  "We are all broken toasters, but we still
FMP Computer Services |    manage to make toast"
512-259-1190          |
http://www.fmp.com    |        - Cheryl Dehut


From fmouse-mailman at fmp.com  Tue Dec 11 01:57:41 2012
From: fmouse-mailman at fmp.com (Lindsay Haisley)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 18:57:41 -0600
Subject: [Mailman-Users] A quick couple of questions regarding "From",
 "Sender" and Gmail
In-Reply-To: <1355175674.53063.92.camel@pudina.fmp.com>
References: <1355175674.53063.92.camel@pudina.fmp.com>
Message-ID: <1355187461.53063.129.camel@pudina.fmp.com>

Never mind, I found everything I needed.

On Mon, 2012-12-10 at 15:41 -0600, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> I'm trying to reply to a comment from a Mailman list subscriber on a
> list I manage, and have a couple of questions which someone might be
> able to answer quickly, or post me a link, much faster than I can
> research the matter.
> 
> At what header fields an an email (From, Sender, Reply-to) does Mailman
> 2.1.15 look when determining if an email is from a list subscriber and
> what's the algorithm it uses, if other than a simple OR of the
> addresses?
> 
> What are the known issues with Gmail and Mailman, especially those which
> might result in an email being silently dropped on the floor?  A
> reference to an existing thread or article would be helpful.
> 

-- 
Lindsay Haisley       | "Real programmers use butterflies"
FMP Computer Services |
512-259-1190          |       - xkcd
http://www.fmp.com    |


From mark at msapiro.net  Tue Dec 11 06:34:29 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 21:34:29 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Digest growing to infinity
In-Reply-To: <87mwxm118b.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <PC19932012121021342906713dc488bc@MSAPIRO>


Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:

>Jan Krohn writes:
>
> > The digest being sent out is the same one every day, and the new posts are
> > just appended to it.
>
>That's incorrect, and it sounds like the digest file is not being
>deleted properly.  Deleting a file requires write access to the
>containing directory, not to the file, so it's possible for the file
>to be appendable but not deletable.
>
>Ask the host to run Mailman's check_perms script.


It certainly seems that Mailman's cron/senddigests is not removing the
lists/LISTNAME/digest.mbox file after creating the digest. I doubt
however that check_perms will find a problem. The lists/LISTNAME/
directory must be writable by Mailman as it also contains the list
configuration files and every time the list is updated for a post or
anything else, a new temporary config file is created and then the
existing files all have their names changed so that the config becomes
the backup and the new temporary file becomes the config, all of which
requires write access to the directory.

My first thought is that cron/senddigests is not being run as the
Mailman user, but that seems unlikely as other lists work.

The host also needs to check Mailman's error log which should contain
clues.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From pasqualinic at fcal.uner.edu.ar  Tue Dec 11 13:50:07 2012
From: pasqualinic at fcal.uner.edu.ar (Carlos R. Pasqualini)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 09:50:07 -0300
Subject: [Mailman-Users] reject on max_message_size exceeded
In-Reply-To: <PC19932012120714053407344e0d7b00@MSAPIRO>
References: <PC19932012120714053407344e0d7b00@MSAPIRO>
Message-ID: <1355230207.7051.90.camel@capibara.fcal.uner.edu.ar>

El vie, 07-12-2012 a las 14:05 -0800, Mark Sapiro escribi?:
> Carlos R. Pasqualini wrote:
> >
> >i cannot find any way to reject emails (coming from valid senders) which
> >exceeded the maximum allowed message size.
> >
> >mailman currently put them on hold, but i want to instantly reject it
> >with an alert to the user.
> 
> 
> Then you need to either modify Mailman/Handlers/Hold.py as indicated in
> the post you found here
> 
> 
> >the only thing i found is:
> >http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users at python.org/msg46813.html
> >
> >but i don't think that shall be good idea
> 
> 
> Or you could implement a custom handler <http://wiki.list.org/x/l4A9>
> to go in the pipeline prior to Hold which would do this test and
> rejection.
> 
> 
> >is there a simple/standard way of configuring this behavior?
> 
> 
> No.
> 


Thanks Mark!



From mark at msapiro.net  Tue Dec 11 21:04:58 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 12:04:58 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Filtering Mail with Regexes: Possible?
In-Reply-To: <CAFMGiz911qr3twwOSL+y8sr=PetH5QbM8MafVTBLT0fhpRGMTQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <PC1993201212111204580968a48cbe02@MSAPIRO>

Tom Browder wrote:

>I would like to be able to filter message bodies and put a hold for
>approval on those with html links in them to try to catch address book
>hijacked mail (mail sent to a list of addresses stolen from
>subscribers' contact lists).
>
>Is that possible?


Yes, but not via the standard configuration. You need to implement a
custom handler <http://wiki.list.org/x/l4A9>. That FAQ contains a
skeleton example MyHandler.py which does what you ask and more.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From tom.browder at gmail.com  Tue Dec 11 23:33:23 2012
From: tom.browder at gmail.com (Tom Browder)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 16:33:23 -0600
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Filtering Mail with Regexes: Possible?
In-Reply-To: <PC1993201212111204580968a48cbe02@MSAPIRO>
References: <CAFMGiz911qr3twwOSL+y8sr=PetH5QbM8MafVTBLT0fhpRGMTQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<PC1993201212111204580968a48cbe02@MSAPIRO>
Message-ID: <CAFMGiz9AsCjS+k-SRzcG+XK2fiMTniVj4SSo1RxDHeWO-gDmAg@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net> wrote:
> Tom Browder wrote:
>>I would like to be able to filter message bodies and put a hold for
>>approval on those with html links in them to try to catch address book
...
>>Is that possible?
...
> Yes, but not via the standard configuration. You need to implement a
> custom handler <http://wiki.list.org/x/l4A9>. That FAQ contains a
> skeleton example MyHandler.py which does what you ask and more.

Thanks, Mark!

Best,

-Tom

From mark at msapiro.net  Wed Dec 12 02:52:18 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 17:52:18 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} Re: mailman postfix
 ldap virtual user
In-Reply-To: <CAF0q29vi=g5rBASXeQAQOeM6QR2P-OtX3Pso6JXfwUOUypcWUA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAF0q29taHcuEiPU5U9SNa-4qmiN3XegYoEOnH=_A+RkE8VRfyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<50C4CA1E.9030603@msapiro.net>
	<CAF0q29s-2uFsJuwRD6HJSVaT7vMnfrQKjNve7sriQ28k8gKOxg@mail.gmail.com>
	<50C4FBFE.6020204@msapiro.net>
	<CAF0q29v=xthMFnTvUavKwF4T92fN+icrhBDspyYR3VqNevG00w@mail.gmail.com>
	<87sj7e1won.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
	<CAF0q29vi=g5rBASXeQAQOeM6QR2P-OtX3Pso6JXfwUOUypcWUA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <50C7E352.2000504@msapiro.net>

On 12/9/2012 11:03 PM, G?khan Alkan wrote:
[...]
> virtual_transport = dovecot


You have defined the virtual_transport to be dovecot. Dovecot doesn't
recognize alias_maps. To use alias_maps you have to deliver via the
'local' transport.

If you are using dovecot as your LDA for some purpose, then the best
option is to have a dedicated domain for Mailman lists and use
transport_maps to specify 'local' as the transport for that domain.

If you don't need the dovecot LDA, just remove

virtual_transport = dovecot

If you need the dovecot LDA for non-list addresses in the list's
domain(s), you can use the ideas in the FAQ at
<http://wiki.list.org/x/ZoCj> to automatically generate transport
mappings to 'local' for just the list addresses.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From Jan at vic-fontaine.com  Wed Dec 12 16:39:48 2012
From: Jan at vic-fontaine.com (Jan Krohn)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 22:39:48 +0700
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Digest growing to infinity
In-Reply-To: <PC19932012121021342906713dc488bc@MSAPIRO>
References: <87mwxm118b.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
	<PC19932012121021342906713dc488bc@MSAPIRO>
Message-ID: <001d01cdd87e$f23f8360$d6be8a20$@vic-fontaine.com>

Thanks for the replies so far. The host has reset the permissions. No digest
was sent out today, which is a bit strange. The next run will show if
everything's fine now...

Jan 

-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Mark Sapiro [mailto:mark at msapiro.net] 
Gesendet: Dienstag, 11. Dezember 2012 12:34
An: Stephen J. Turnbull; Jan Krohn
Cc: Mailman-Users at python.org
Betreff: Re: [Mailman-Users] Digest growing to infinity

It certainly seems that Mailman's cron/senddigests is not removing the
lists/LISTNAME/digest.mbox file after creating the digest. I doubt however
that check_perms will find a problem. The lists/LISTNAME/ directory must be
writable by Mailman as it also contains the list configuration files and
every time the list is updated for a post or anything else, a new temporary
config file is created and then the existing files all have their names
changed so that the config becomes the backup and the new temporary file
becomes the config, all of which requires write access to the directory.

My first thought is that cron/senddigests is not being run as the Mailman
user, but that seems unlikely as other lists work.

The host also needs to check Mailman's error log which should contain clues.


From joliver at john-oliver.net  Tue Dec 11 21:59:09 2012
From: joliver at john-oliver.net (John Oliver)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 12:59:09 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Two questions
Message-ID: <20121211205909.GA14416@ns2.sdsitehosting.net>

1) How do I create different "list creator" passwords for multiple
virtualhosts?  For example, www.domaina.com and www.domainb.com can have
different lists... I want to have different passwords so someone who can
admin one cannot admin the other

2) How do I "link" dissimilar domains?  For example, if I have
domain.com, domain.net, and myawesomedomain.org and all three URLs lead
to the same site, so the lists for one site should show up under the
others, be administered the same way, etc.

FWIW, I'm running CentOS 5.8 and mailman-2.1.9-6.el5_6.1

-- 
***********************************************************************
* John Oliver                             http://www.john-oliver.net/ *
*                                                                     *
***********************************************************************

From mark at msapiro.net  Wed Dec 12 18:38:09 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 09:38:09 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Two questions
In-Reply-To: <20121211205909.GA14416@ns2.sdsitehosting.net>
Message-ID: <PC1993201212120938090156044ddea5@MSAPIRO>

John Oliver wrote:

>1) How do I create different "list creator" passwords for multiple
>virtualhosts?  For example, www.domaina.com and www.domainb.com can have
>different lists... I want to have different passwords so someone who can
>admin one cannot admin the other


This would require running a separate Mailman instance for each host.
There is only one list creator password per Mailman instance.


>2) How do I "link" dissimilar domains?  For example, if I have
>domain.com, domain.net, and myawesomedomain.org and all three URLs lead
>to the same site, so the lists for one site should show up under the
>others, be administered the same way, etc.


Set

VIRTUAL_HOST_OVERVIEW = Off

in mm_cfg.py. See the documentation in the

#####
# Virtual domains
#####

section in Defaults.py. However, this may not be what you want as it
will "link" all domains in that Mailman instance, not just some.

It seems you may want a separate Mailman instance for each set of
related domains.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From cacities at gmail.com  Thu Dec 13 18:50:55 2012
From: cacities at gmail.com (The League CA Cities)
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 09:50:55 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] creating hidden field to stop bot spam subscription
	request
Message-ID: <CACRko7YU8_vgrSdWTDaApQ7XYgtyNYs4rDoCUhP2fRcg71POcQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hello

some of my list are being spammed with bot subscription request. I am
looking for a way to add a hidden field to the subscription page of each
list that a bot would see but a human user will not.

I would like to have Mailman automatically drop any subscription request
that has the hidden field fill out.

below is the subscription area for the list and I have added the subject
field. the subject field is what i would like to hide and have drop the
request.

Subscribe-Box>
            </font>
 </TD>
 <TD WIDTH="12%"><font face="Verdana" size="2"> </font></TD></TR>
      <tr>
        <td bgcolor="#dddddd" width="55%"><font face="Verdana"
size="2">Your name & City/Company (required):</font></td>
        <td width="33%"><font face="Verdana"
size="2"><mm-fullname-box></font></td>
 <TD WIDTH="12%"><font face="Verdana" size="2"> </font></TD></TR>
      <TR>
<td bgcolor="#dddddd" width="55%"><font face="Verdana" size="2">Subject
(required):</font></td>
        <td width="33%"><font face="Verdana"
size="2"><mm-fullname-box></font></td>
 <TD WIDTH="12%"><font face="Verdana" size="2"> </font></TD></TR>
      <TR>

I am new to HTML and this is as far as i can get at the moment. If anyone
has any suggestions I would greatly appreciate it. I am running Mailman on
a Linux server.

Thank  you

Doug

From mark at msapiro.net  Fri Dec 14 18:52:42 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 09:52:42 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] creating hidden field to stop bot spam
	subscriptionrequest
In-Reply-To: <CACRko7YU8_vgrSdWTDaApQ7XYgtyNYs4rDoCUhP2fRcg71POcQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <PC1993201212140952420328a483e772@MSAPIRO>

The League CA Cities wrote:
>
>some of my list are being spammed with bot subscription request. I am
>looking for a way to add a hidden field to the subscription page of each
>list that a bot would see but a human user will not.
>
>I would like to have Mailman automatically drop any subscription request
>that has the hidden field fill out.


This is not a solution to the problem you face. What you want is a
hidden field in the form that contains secret data the bot doesn't
know. Then you reject the request if the form comes back without the
secret.

None of these methods is foolproof as the subscribe form is public, so
the bot can always retrieve it first, but the hope is that it won't.

See the bug report at <https://bugs.launchpad.net/mailman/+bug/1082746>
and the list threads linked therefrom.

Also, see the "fix" at
<http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~mailman-coders/mailman/2.1/revision/1371>.


>below is the subscription area for the list and I have added the subject
>field. the subject field is what i would like to hide and have drop the
>request.


I don't think there is a way in HTML to do what you envision, but you
can implement the above "fix" and as long as you are using the
subscribe form on Mailman's listinfo page, it will work. Whether it
will be effective at stopping bot subscription requests is a separate
question. See the threads linked from the bug report.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From Richard at Damon-Family.org  Sat Dec 15 03:08:00 2012
From: Richard at Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 21:08:00 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] creating hidden field to stop bot spam
	subscriptionrequest
In-Reply-To: <PC1993201212140952420328a483e772@MSAPIRO>
References: <PC1993201212140952420328a483e772@MSAPIRO>
Message-ID: <50CBDB80.3080009@Damon-Family.org>

On 12/14/12 12:52 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> The League CA Cities wrote:
>> some of my list are being spammed with bot subscription request. I am
>> looking for a way to add a hidden field to the subscription page of each
>> list that a bot would see but a human user will not.
>>
>> I would like to have Mailman automatically drop any subscription request
>> that has the hidden field fill out.
>
> This is not a solution to the problem you face. What you want is a
> hidden field in the form that contains secret data the bot doesn't
> know. Then you reject the request if the form comes back without the
> secret.
>
Actually that is a well know method to stop many bots. They will crawl
the web looking for subscription forms, and when they find one, fill it
out. If you add a field to the form that humans with normal web browsers
will not see, and thus not fill out, then a bot that is filling out most
fields (as it might be a required field, and they don't want to make the
effort to try to parse a reply back) will trip up and fill in the
honeypot field.

Normally this is done by using CSS to hide the field, using the
attribute display:none

For other types of bots, having a key on the page that is needed to be
returned will help, as it will catch bots that "know" what the
subscription form looks like and just go around trying to submit it.
Even better is to give out different keys each time, and checking that
the key isn't too old or too young (figuring a human will take at least
a few seconds to fill out the form, but the bot won't be patient enough
to do that).

-- 
Richard Damon


From stephen at xemacs.org  Sat Dec 15 03:27:27 2012
From: stephen at xemacs.org (Stephen J. Turnbull)
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2012 11:27:27 +0900
Subject: [Mailman-Users] creating hidden field to stop bot
	spam	subscriptionrequest
In-Reply-To: <PC1993201212140952420328a483e772@MSAPIRO>
References: <CACRko7YU8_vgrSdWTDaApQ7XYgtyNYs4rDoCUhP2fRcg71POcQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<PC1993201212140952420328a483e772@MSAPIRO>
Message-ID: <87r4msxd68.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>

Mark Sapiro writes:
 > The League CA Cities wrote:

 > >some of my list are being spammed with bot subscription request. I am
 > >looking for a way to add a hidden field to the subscription page of each
 > >list that a bot would see but a human user will not.
 > >
 > >I would like to have Mailman automatically drop any subscription request
 > >that has the hidden field fill out.
 > 
 > This is not a solution to the problem you face. What you want is a
 > hidden field in the form that contains secret data the bot doesn't
 > know. Then you reject the request if the form comes back without the
 > secret.

This won't work if the 'bot is actually visiting the subscription page
first; even a CSRF cookie (or any other one-time-key) will fail.  This
wouldn't be hard for spammers to implement at all.  And of course
anything you don't tell the 'bot will probably not be known.

Actually, all you want is a custom form requiring the user to enter
some data that they won't know unless they actually understand the
text of the form (aka CAPTCHA, but there's probably no need to vex
your users with distorted images of text as long as it's not a
standard Mailman feature).  Something like

Tell me again, what list do you want to subscribe to? [       ]

would do.




From mark at msapiro.net  Sat Dec 15 04:58:13 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 19:58:13 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] creating hidden field to stop bot
	spamsubscriptionrequest
In-Reply-To: <50CBDB80.3080009@Damon-Family.org>
Message-ID: <PC199320121214195813010920cafc7a@MSAPIRO>

Richard Damon wrote:
>
>For other types of bots, having a key on the page that is needed to be
>returned will help, as it will catch bots that "know" what the
>subscription form looks like and just go around trying to submit it.
>Even better is to give out different keys each time, and checking that
>the key isn't too old or too young (figuring a human will take at least
>a few seconds to fill out the form, but the bot won't be patient enough
>to do that).


Except for the "too young" part this is what is implemented by
<http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~mailman-coders/mailman/2.1/revision/1371>.
Too young could be a useful addition.

But, as Stephen points out, if the people who deploy these bots are
really interested in "getting the job done", they will figure out all
these tricks and deploy new bots that will succeed in spite of us.

The asking of a question which requires an "obvious to a human but
extremely difficult to a machine" answer is probably the best defence
as long as the questions and answers aren't fixed over many Mailman
installations.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From stephen at xemacs.org  Sat Dec 15 06:25:21 2012
From: stephen at xemacs.org (Stephen J. Turnbull)
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2012 14:25:21 +0900
Subject: [Mailman-Users] creating hidden field to stop
	bot	spamsubscriptionrequest
In-Reply-To: <PC199320121214195813010920cafc7a@MSAPIRO>
References: <50CBDB80.3080009@Damon-Family.org>
	<PC199320121214195813010920cafc7a@MSAPIRO>
Message-ID: <87mwxfyji6.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>

Mark Sapiro writes:

 > The asking of a question which requires an "obvious to a human but
 > extremely difficult to a machine" answer is probably the best
 > defence as long as the questions and answers aren't fixed over many
 > Mailman installations.

That's a great idea, actually!  How about a standard (but optional)
feature for the subscription page like this:

   *Please read the following description carefully.  You will be*
   *tested on the content later.                                 *

    This is the mailman-users list.  It is used for communication
    about the Mailman mailing list management software, primarily
    among users, although developers often participate.

    To subscribe

    Your name: [                                                ]
    Your email: [                                               ]
   *Test question:                                               *
   *    Do programmers of this package lurk here?  (yes/no) [   ]*

Of course the "test question" would be list-owner configured, a la the
"security question" for password recovery that is commonly
implemented.  The portions enclosed in stars would only be generated
if the "test question" were non-blank.

The answer to the "test question" could be further obfuscated by
placing it on a different page.

Steve

From Richard at Damon-Family.org  Sat Dec 15 16:59:27 2012
From: Richard at Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2012 10:59:27 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] creating hidden field to stop bot
	spamsubscriptionrequest
In-Reply-To: <PC199320121214195813010920cafc7a@MSAPIRO>
References: <PC199320121214195813010920cafc7a@MSAPIRO>
Message-ID: <50CC9E5F.3080701@Damon-Family.org>

On 12/14/12 10:58 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> Richard Damon wrote:
>> For other types of bots, having a key on the page that is needed to be
>> returned will help, as it will catch bots that "know" what the
>> subscription form looks like and just go around trying to submit it.
>> Even better is to give out different keys each time, and checking that
>> the key isn't too old or too young (figuring a human will take at least
>> a few seconds to fill out the form, but the bot won't be patient enough
>> to do that).
>
> Except for the "too young" part this is what is implemented by
> <http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~mailman-coders/mailman/2.1/revision/1371>.
> Too young could be a useful addition.
>
> But, as Stephen points out, if the people who deploy these bots are
> really interested in "getting the job done", they will figure out all
> these tricks and deploy new bots that will succeed in spite of us.
>
> The asking of a question which requires an "obvious to a human but
> extremely difficult to a machine" answer is probably the best defence
> as long as the questions and answers aren't fixed over many Mailman
> installations.
>
These methods are designed to repel "most" attacks. The basic idea is
make it difficult enough to "beat the defense" that the spammer goes
elsewhere. The idea is these bots are written to do as little processing
as needed to find entry vectors. If you are step more difficult than
most, then it isn't worth upgrading the bot to beating the defense, as
the additional processing to get to you costs a lot more sites not checked.

Since the whole purpose of the subscription page is to allow an
interested person to subscribe, it becomes very hard to totally block
the spammer, as if they really want YOU, then the cost to have a person
do it manually isn't that extremely high. The one thing the list owner
has going is that it is unlikely that they are a big enough of a unique
target to attract a dedicated spammer. What might be more of a issue
would be a "hacktivist", but that is a totally different type of
protection needed.

-- 
Richard Damon


From tom.browder at gmail.com  Sat Dec 15 22:04:50 2012
From: tom.browder at gmail.com (Tom Browder)
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2012 15:04:50 -0600
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Filtering Mail with Regexes: Possible? [SOLVED]
Message-ID: <CAFMGiz_FS-HqtyQMMc6onVyJfrKHTgXOO9ooo1JxtDup9QQKbA@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Tom Browder <tom.browder at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net> wrote:
>> Tom Browder wrote:
>>>I would like to be able to filter message bodies and put a hold for
>>>approval on those with html links in them to try to catch address book
> ...
>>>Is that possible?
> ...
>> Yes, but not via the standard configuration. You need to implement a
>> custom handler <http://wiki.list.org/x/l4A9>. That FAQ contains a
>> skeleton example MyHandler.py which does what you ask and more.

Mark, I tried it and it works great!

I think the FAQ title needs to mention "filter" or "regex" because the
existing title ("How do I implement a custom handler in Mailman?")
didn't ring that bell for me (my bad, but I have to live with it).

I tried to do some editing in the FAQs but, even after I established
an account and I logged in, I couldn't find the way to do it, so I'll
keep hunting around.

Best regards,

-Tom

From mark at msapiro.net  Sun Dec 16 00:20:14 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2012 15:20:14 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Filtering Mail with Regexes: Possible? [SOLVED]
In-Reply-To: <CAFMGiz_FS-HqtyQMMc6onVyJfrKHTgXOO9ooo1JxtDup9QQKbA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <PC19932012121515201400627357e64c@MSAPIRO>

Tom Browder wrote:
>
>I tried to do some editing in the FAQs but, even after I established
>an account and I logged in, I couldn't find the way to do it, so I'll
>keep hunting around.


Due to severe issues with wiki spam, you need to be granted write
permission before you can update the wiki. I have given you
permission. I have augmented the title of the FAQ to include the words
'filter' and 'regex', but feel free to make further changes if you
feel they're warranted.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From tom.browder at gmail.com  Sun Dec 16 04:43:53 2012
From: tom.browder at gmail.com (Tom Browder)
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2012 21:43:53 -0600
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Filtering Mail with Regexes: Possible? [SOLVED]
In-Reply-To: <PC19932012121515201400627357e64c@MSAPIRO>
References: <CAFMGiz_FS-HqtyQMMc6onVyJfrKHTgXOO9ooo1JxtDup9QQKbA@mail.gmail.com>
	<PC19932012121515201400627357e64c@MSAPIRO>
Message-ID: <CAFMGiz9S=q=CtHO7qRiJVXSyXeO9G-L04UjWFJc9CxEb4onnFA@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net> wrote:
> Tom Browder wrote:
...
>>I tried to do some editing in the FAQs but, even after I established
>>an account and I logged in, I couldn't find the way to do it, so I'll
...
> Due to severe issues with wiki spam, you need to be granted write
> permission before you can update the wiki. I have given you
> permission. I have augmented the title of the FAQ to include the words
> 'filter' and 'regex', but feel free to make further changes if you
> feel they're warranted.

Thanks, Mark.

Best,

-Tom

From stephen at xemacs.org  Sun Dec 16 15:29:58 2012
From: stephen at xemacs.org (Stephen J. Turnbull)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2012 23:29:58 +0900
Subject: [Mailman-Users] creating hidden field to stop
	bot	spamsubscriptionrequest
In-Reply-To: <50CC9E5F.3080701@Damon-Family.org>
References: <PC199320121214195813010920cafc7a@MSAPIRO>
	<50CC9E5F.3080701@Damon-Family.org>
Message-ID: <87fw36xe6x.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>

Richard Damon writes:

 > These methods are designed to repel "most" attacks.

Sure, that is understood.  The problem is that if a particular method
is recommended here, there will be a request to add it to Mailman.  At
that point it becomes worth breaking the defense.

 > The idea is these bots are written to do as little processing as
 > needed to find entry vectors. If you are step more difficult than
 > most, then it isn't worth upgrading the bot to beating the defense,
 > as the additional processing to get to you costs a lot more sites
 > not checked.

AFAICS this is a myth.  I think the bots are probably written to do
little processing mostly because the programmers are busy, and parsing
is relatively hard to implement well compared to just POSTing a
request out of the blue.

Certainly the professional spammers lack for neither CPU nor
bandwidth, since they have access to botnets.

 > The one thing the list owner has going is that it is unlikely that
 > they are a big enough of a unique target to attract a dedicated
 > spammer.

Precisely.  That's why these things need to be done on a site by site
basis; discussing them here, and especially putting them into the
Mailman distributions, is likely to decrease their effectiveness.


From aspamkiller at yandex.ru  Sun Dec 16 16:20:23 2012
From: aspamkiller at yandex.ru (=?UTF-8?B?0JTQnw==?=)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2012 17:20:23 +0200
Subject: [Mailman-Users] again postfix+aliases+virtual_domains
Message-ID: <20121216172023.f2b87c5458dcbb2014f46c7b@yandex.ru>

Hi, all

After reading kilometers of posts looks like that subject is a stone of stumble when integratnig mailman with postfix. But, please, don`t scold at me, because I really don`nt get how to glue together my working postfix with virtual domains and one single mailman list.

system info: archlinux, postfix 2.9.4, kernel 3.6.9 x64, mailman 2.1.15

<code>
$ postconf|grep alias
alias_database = $alias_maps
alias_maps = hash:/var/lib/mailman/data/aliases, hash:/etc/postfix/aliases
allow_mail_to_commands = alias, forward, include
allow_mail_to_files = alias, forward, include
expand_owner_alias = no
local_recipient_maps = proxy:unix:passwd.byname $alias_maps
newaliases_path = /usr/bin/newaliases
proxy_read_maps = $local_recipient_maps $mydestination $virtual_alias_maps $virtual_alias_domains $virtual_mailbox_maps $virtual_mailbox_domains $relay_recipient_maps $relay_domains $canonical_maps $sender_canonical_maps $recipient_canonical_maps $relocated_maps $transport_maps $mynetworks $sender_bcc_maps $recipient_bcc_maps $smtp_generic_maps $lmtp_generic_maps $alias_maps
reset_owner_alias = no
unknown_virtual_alias_reject_code = 550
virtual_alias_domains = $virtual_alias_maps
virtual_alias_expansion_limit = 1000
virtual_alias_maps = hash:/var/lib/mailman/data/virtual-mailman, mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql_virtual_alias_maps.cf
virtual_alias_recursion_limit = 1000
</code>

<code>
# mm_cfg.py
MTA = 'Postfix'
DEFAULT_EMAIL_HOST = 'my-domain.com.ua'
DEFAULT_URL_HOST = 'mail2.my-domain.com.ua'
DEFAULT_URL_PATTERN = 'http://mail2.my-domain.com.ua/mylist/'

POSTFIX_STYLE_VIRTUAL_DOMAINS = ['my-domain.com.ua']
VIRTUAL_MAILMAN_LOCAL_DOMAIN = 'my-domain.com.ua'
add_virtualhost(DEFAULT_URL_HOST, DEFAULT_EMAIL_HOST)
</code>

All aliases files was generated by genaliases, and I did`nt modified them.
All of them are under the mailman.mailman user rights =rw----.

<code>
## /var/lib/mailman/data/aliases
# The ultimate loop stopper address
mylist-loop: /var/lib/mailman/data/owner-bounces.mbox

# STANZA START: mylist
# CREATED: Sun Dec 16 16:53:24 2012
mylist:             /var/lib/mailman/qfiles/maildir/
mylist-admin:       /var/lib/mailman/qfiles/maildir/
mylist-bounces:     /var/lib/mailman/qfiles/maildir/
mylist-confirm:     /var/lib/mailman/qfiles/maildir/
mylist-join:        /var/lib/mailman/qfiles/maildir/
mylist-leave:       /var/lib/mailman/qfiles/maildir/
mylist-owner:       /var/lib/mailman/qfiles/maildir/
mylist-request:     /var/lib/mailman/qfiles/maildir/
mylist-subscribe:   /var/lib/mailman/qfiles/maildir/
mylist-unsubscribe: /var/lib/mailman/qfiles/maildir/
# STANZA END: mylist
</code>

<code>
## /var/lib/mailman/data/virtual-mailman
# LOOP ADDRESSES START
mylist-loop at my-domain.com.ua	mylist-loop at my-domain.com.ua
# LOOP ADDRESSES END

# STANZA START: mylist
# CREATED: Sun Dec 16 16:53:24 2012
mylist at my-domain.com.ua              mylist at my-domain.com.ua
mylist-admin at my-domain.com.ua        mylist-admin at my-domain.com.ua
mylist-bounces at my-domain.com.ua      mylist-bounces at my-domain.com.ua
mylist-confirm at my-domain.com.ua      mylist-confirm at my-domain.com.ua
mylist-join at my-domain.com.ua         mylist-join at my-domain.com.ua
mylist-leave at my-domain.com.ua        mylist-leave at my-domain.com.ua
mylist-owner at my-domain.com.ua        mylist-owner at my-domain.com.ua
mylist-request at my-domain.com.ua      mylist-request at my-domain.com.ua
mylist-subscribe at my-domain.com.ua    mylist-subscribe at my-domain.com.ua
mylist-unsubscribe at my-domain.com.ua  mylist-unsubscribe at my-domain.com.ua
# STANZA END: mylist
</code>

Also I`ve added that to /etc/postfix/aliases, even I think this is not important now.

<code>
## /etc/postfix/aliases part
## mailman mailing list
mailman:              "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman post mailman"
mailman-admin:        "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman admin mailman"
mailman-bounces:      "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman bounces mailman"
mailman-confirm:      "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman confirm mailman"
mailman-join:         "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman join mailman"
mailman-leave:        "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman leave mailman"
mailman-owner:        "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman owner mailman"
mailman-request:      "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman request mailman"
mailman-subscribe:    "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman subscribe mailman"
mailman-unsubscribe:  "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman unsubscribe mailman"
</code>

root # echo "test" | mail mylist at my-domain.com.ua

causes error:

Dec 16 16:53:30 kserv postfix/qmgr[11704]: 33204999DE: from=<root at mail.my-domain.com.ua>, size=450, nrcpt=1 (queue active)

Dec 16 16:53:30 kserv postfix/virtual[11714]: 33204999DE: to=<mylist at my-domain.com.ua>, relay=virtual, delay=0.24, delays=0.17/0.01/0/0.07, dsn=5.1.1, status=bounced (unknown user: "mylist at my-domain.com.ua")

Dec 16 16:53:30 kserv postfix/cleanup[11709]: 5D0ADBB245: message-id=<20121216145330.5D0ADBB245 at mail.my-domain.com.ua>

Please help! Any glue, please!

//Dimitri

From mark at msapiro.net  Sun Dec 16 19:00:56 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2012 10:00:56 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] again postfix+aliases+virtual_domains
In-Reply-To: <20121216172023.f2b87c5458dcbb2014f46c7b@yandex.ru>
References: <20121216172023.f2b87c5458dcbb2014f46c7b@yandex.ru>
Message-ID: <50CE0C58.70202@msapiro.net>

On 12/16/2012 7:20 AM, ?? wrote:
> Hi, all
> 
> After reading kilometers of posts looks like that subject is a stone of stumble when integratnig mailman with postfix. But, please, don`t scold at me, because I really don`nt get how to glue together my working postfix with virtual domains and one single mailman list.
> 
> system info: archlinux, postfix 2.9.4, kernel 3.6.9 x64, mailman 2.1.15
> 
> <code>
> $ postconf|grep alias


Sigh... where to start ...

First of all, when trying to communicate Postfix configurations,
unedited, full output from `postconf -n` with possible munging of domain
names (only if done consistently) is almost always preferable.


> alias_database = $alias_maps
> alias_maps = hash:/var/lib/mailman/data/aliases, hash:/etc/postfix/aliases
> allow_mail_to_commands = alias, forward, include
> allow_mail_to_files = alias, forward, include
> expand_owner_alias = no
> local_recipient_maps = proxy:unix:passwd.byname $alias_maps
> newaliases_path = /usr/bin/newaliases
> proxy_read_maps = $local_recipient_maps $mydestination $virtual_alias_maps $virtual_alias_domains $virtual_mailbox_maps $virtual_mailbox_domains $relay_recipient_maps $relay_domains $canonical_maps $sender_canonical_maps $recipient_canonical_maps $relocated_maps $transport_maps $mynetworks $sender_bcc_maps $recipient_bcc_maps $smtp_generic_maps $lmtp_generic_maps $alias_maps
> reset_owner_alias = no
> unknown_virtual_alias_reject_code = 550
> virtual_alias_domains = $virtual_alias_maps
> virtual_alias_expansion_limit = 1000
> virtual_alias_maps = hash:/var/lib/mailman/data/virtuailman,al-m mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql_virtual_alias_maps.cf
> virtual_alias_recursion_limit = 1000
> </code>
> 
> <code>
> # mm_cfg.py
> MTA = 'Postfix'
> DEFAULT_EMAIL_HOST = 'my-domain.com.ua'
> DEFAULT_URL_HOST = 'mail2.my-domain.com.ua'
> DEFAULT_URL_PATTERN = 'http://mail2.my-domain.com.ua/mylist/'


DEFAULT_URL_PATTERN gets interpolated with the host name and the
listname gets appended, so if you want to drop the '/mailman' from
Mailman URLs, set

DEFAULT_URL_PATTERN = 'http://%s/'

Otherwise, the setting in Defaults.py

DEFAULT_URL_PATTERN = 'http://%s/mailman/'

should be fine without any mm_cfg.py override.


> POSTFIX_STYLE_VIRTUAL_DOMAINS = ['my-domain.com.ua']
> VIRTUAL_MAILMAN_LOCAL_DOMAIN = 'my-domain.com.ua'


The above is clearly wrong. Either 'my-domain.com.ua' is a virtual
domain in Postfix or it is a local domain. If it is a local domain, you
don't want either of the above two lines and you don't want
'hash:/var/lib/mailman/data/virtuailman' in Postfix virtual_alias_maps.

If ti is a virtual domain in Postfix, you absolutely don't want

VIRTUAL_MAILMAN_LOCAL_DOMAIN = 'my-domain.com.ua'

as that will map the virtual address mylist at my-domain.com.ua to the
supposedly local address mylist at my-domain.com.ua, which at best is a
loop. Normally, setting VIRTUAL_MAILMAN_LOCAL_DOMAIN in mm_cfg.py is not
required, but if it is set, it needs to be set to one of the domains in
Postfix my_destination, e.g. 'localhost'.


> add_virtualhost(DEFAULT_URL_HOST, DEFAULT_EMAIL_HOST)
> </code>
> 
> All aliases files was generated by genaliases, and I did`nt modified them.
> All of them are under the mailman.mailman user rights =rw----.
> 
> <code>
> ## /var/lib/mailman/data/aliases
> # The ultimate loop stopper address mylist-loop:
> /var/lib/mailman/data/owner-bounces.mbox
> 
> # STANZA START: mylist
> # CREATED: Sun Dec 16 16:53:24 2012
> mylist:             /var/lib/mailman/qfiles/maildir/
> mylist-admin:       /var/lib/mailman/qfiles/maildir/
> mylist-bounces:     /var/lib/mailman/qfiles/maildir/
> mylist-confirm:     /var/lib/mailman/qfiles/maildir/
> mylist-join:        /var/lib/mailman/qfiles/maildir/
> mylist-leave:       /var/lib/mailman/qfiles/maildir/
> mylist-owner:       /var/lib/mailman/qfiles/maildir/
> mylist-request:     /var/lib/mailman/qfiles/maildir/
> mylist-subscribe:   /var/lib/mailman/qfiles/maildir/
> mylist-unsubscribe: /var/lib/mailman/qfiles/maildir/
> # STANZA END: mylist

Something is very wrong here. The above aliases indicate you have set

USE_MAILDIR = Yes

but I don't see that in mm_cfg.py above. In any case, maildir delivery
to Mailman is experimental, as far as I know no one uses it, and it also
requires that MaildirRunner be enabled. See the documentation in
Defaults.py.


> </code>
> 
> <code>
> ## /var/lib/mailman/data/virtual-mailman
> # LOOP ADDRESSES START
> mylist-loop at my-domain.com.ua	mylist-loop at my-domain.com.ua
> # LOOP ADDRESSES END
> 
> # STANZA START: mylist
> # CREATED: Sun Dec 16 16:53:24 2012
> mylist at my-domain.com.ua              mylist at my-domain.com.ua


Here we see the mappings I mentioned above. The 'virtual' addresses are
mapped to themselves which can't work.


> mylist-admin at my-domain.com.ua        mylist-admin at my-domain.com.ua
> mylist-bounces at my-domain.com.ua      mylist-bounces at my-domain.com.ua
> mylist-confirm at my-domain.com.ua      mylist-confirm at my-domain.com.ua
> mylist-join at my-domain.com.ua         mylist-join at my-domain.com.ua
> mylist-leave at my-domain.com.ua        mylist-leave at my-domain.com.ua
> mylist-owner at my-domain.com.ua        mylist-owner at my-domain.com.ua
> mylist-request at my-domain.com.ua      mylist-request at my-domain.com.ua
> mylist-subscribe at my-domain.com.ua    mylist-subscribe at my-domain.com.ua
> mylist-unsubscribe at my-domain.com.ua  mylist-unsubscribe at my-domain.com.ua
> # STANZA END: mylist
> </code>
> 
> Also I`ve added that to /etc/postfix/aliases, even I think this is not important now.


It makes a difference. Mailman's aliases should be in
/var/lib/mailman/data/aliases(.db) because the owner of the .db file in
which the alias is found determines the user under which Postfix
delivers the mail.


> <code>
> ## /etc/postfix/aliases part
> ## mailman mailing list
> mailman:              "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman post mailman"
> mailman-admin:        "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman admin mailman"
> mailman-bounces:      "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman bounces mailman"
> mailman-confirm:      "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman confirm mailman"
> mailman-join:         "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman join mailman"
> mailman-leave:        "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman leave mailman"
> mailman-owner:        "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman owner mailman"
> mailman-request:      "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman request mailman"
> mailman-subscribe:    "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman subscribe mailman"
> mailman-unsubscribe:  "|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman unsubscribe mailman"
> </code>
> 
> root # echo "test" | mail mylist at my-domain.com.ua
> 
> causes error:
> 
> Dec 16 16:53:30 kserv postfix/qmgr[11704]: 33204999DE: from=<root at mail.my-domain.com.ua>, size=450, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
> 
> Dec 16 16:53:30 kserv postfix/virtual[11714]: 33204999DE: to=<mylist at my-domain.com.ua>, relay=virtual, delay=0.24, delays=0.17/0.01/0/0.07, dsn=5.1.1, status=bounced (unknown user: "mylist at my-domain.com.ua")


Probably because of the incorrect mapping in data/virtual-mailman.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From aspamkiller at yandex.ru  Sun Dec 16 20:17:47 2012
From: aspamkiller at yandex.ru (=?UTF-8?B?0JTQnw==?=)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2012 21:17:47 +0200
Subject: [Mailman-Users] again postfix+aliases+virtual_domains
In-Reply-To: <50CE0C58.70202@msapiro.net>
References: <20121216172023.f2b87c5458dcbb2014f46c7b@yandex.ru>
	<50CE0C58.70202@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <20121216211747.6cca62e5d6f7e087c489fe75@yandex.ru>

On Sun, 16 Dec 2012 10:00:56 -0800
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net> wrote:

> On 12/16/2012 7:20 AM, ?? wrote:
> > Hi, all
> > 
> > After reading kilometers of posts looks like that subject is a stone of stumble when integratnig mailman with postfix. But, please, don`t scold at me, because I really don`nt get how to glue together my working postfix with virtual domains and one single mailman list.
> > 
> > system info: archlinux, postfix 2.9.4, kernel 3.6.9 x64, mailman 2.1.15
> > 
> > <code>
> > $ postconf|grep alias
> 
> 
> Sigh... where to start ...
> 
> First of all, when trying to communicate Postfix configurations,
> unedited, full output from `postconf -n` with possible munging of domain
> names (only if done consistently) is almost always preferable.
> 

Also main.cf in attachment.
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: main.cf
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20121216/a123852e/attachment-0001.ksh>

From lstone19 at stonejongleux.com  Sun Dec 16 22:00:01 2012
From: lstone19 at stonejongleux.com (Larry Stone)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2012 15:00:01 -0600
Subject: [Mailman-Users] again postfix+aliases+virtual_domains
In-Reply-To: <20121216211747.6cca62e5d6f7e087c489fe75@yandex.ru>
References: <20121216172023.f2b87c5458dcbb2014f46c7b@yandex.ru>
	<50CE0C58.70202@msapiro.net>
	<20121216211747.6cca62e5d6f7e087c489fe75@yandex.ru>
Message-ID: <8AE8316A-D108-4263-8D3C-352268C1C834@stonejongleux.com>


On Dec 16, 2012, at 1:17 PM, ?? <aspamkiller at yandex.ru> wrote:

>> First of all, when trying to communicate Postfix configurations,
>> unedited, full output from `postconf -n` with possible munging of domain
>> names (only if done consistently) is almost always preferable.
>> 
> 
> Also main.cf in attachment.
> <main.cf>

Giving us main.cf is NOT the same as postconf -n output. Main.cf shows us how you THINK the system is configured. Postconf -n shows us how the system is ACTUALLY configured.

Requiring postconf -n rather than main.cf is one of the rules of the Postfix support mailing list for reasons (as stated above) that are just as valid here.

-- 
Larry Stone
lstone19 at stonejongleux.com
http://www.stonejongleux.com/




From aspamkiller at yandex.ru  Sun Dec 16 22:55:10 2012
From: aspamkiller at yandex.ru (=?UTF-8?B?0JTQnw==?=)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2012 23:55:10 +0200
Subject: [Mailman-Users] again postfix+aliases+virtual_domains
In-Reply-To: <50CE25D4.6080303@msapiro.net>
References: <20121216172023.f2b87c5458dcbb2014f46c7b@yandex.ru>
	<50CE0C58.70202@msapiro.net>
	<20121216210844.d7e09ac7308e4db63367cae5@yandex.ru>
	<50CE25D4.6080303@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <20121216235510.1fdc1b49deea44a59a05fdda@yandex.ru>

On Sun, 16 Dec 2012 11:49:40 -0800
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net> wrote:

> On 12/16/2012 11:08 AM, ?? wrote:
> > Thank you a lot for your responce. I`m not too strong in mail configurations -  just all is working - and this is fine for me.
> 
> 
> Do I understand correctly that you have made changes and now delivery of
> mail to Mailman is working?

No, I`ve just wrote, that postfix is working for me as expected, misregarding bugs in his configuration, that you pointed.

Mailman is still not working. I though to start new changes in configuration my morning, with my fresh brain.

Sorry for my English, it is not my native language.

//D
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: postconf.output
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20121216/eb2aadcb/attachment.ksh>

From igoetrich at yahoo.de  Mon Dec 17 19:31:03 2012
From: igoetrich at yahoo.de (E Kogler)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 18:31:03 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Mailman-Users] (no subject)
Message-ID: <1355769063.55236.BPMail_high_noncarrier@web29401.mail.ird.yahoo.com>


How are things?  http://uaelaser.com/otro.html      Mon, 17 Dec 2012 12:31:05

From karra.etc at gmail.com  Tue Dec 18 11:05:25 2012
From: karra.etc at gmail.com (Sriram Karra)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 15:35:25 +0530
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Simplified mailman installation setup for
	corporate internal list server
In-Reply-To: <CAFkt3UPGMvK60XbeMkVSkYaYTukoQViZc0wwE4nM8oWP4MD2cw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAFkt3UPGMvK60XbeMkVSkYaYTukoQViZc0wwE4nM8oWP4MD2cw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAFkt3UMtp3Xmuk9r9L-cx8asVzCqgjia095ksF6Qj7KnDfFoAw@mail.gmail.com>

Having received no response, I proceeded to write the simple web interface
that I wanted (and described in my earlier mail as under). Replying to my
own mail here in the hope anyone else looking for something similar can
find it and possibly reuse this work.

The code is available on Github at:
https://github.com/skarra/GNU-Mailman-SSO Some screenshots and an overview
of the customizations can be seen here:
http://skarra.github.com/GNU-Mailman-SSO/

Cheers,
-Karra


On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 11:11 PM, Sriram Karra <karra.etc at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Hi, I am exploring deploying a simple mailman setup for the small company
> I work at. By simplified I mean the following:
>
> 1. All users are authenticated already using a single sign on. No password
> should be required for any activity.
>
> 2. Any user should be able to create lists (only owners can administer
> lists). We will still have private and public lists.
>
> 3. A user on logon should be able to manage her subscriptions using a
> simple "on/off" click, without per-list passwords, or confirmation emails
> and stuff. Another way to put it is I want a "/mailman/userinfo" script in
> addition to the /mailman/listinfo interface.
>
> I am quite sure someone else has also thought of this sort of a
> deployment. Is there any code or customization sample I can look and
> explore. If no such instances are known, what do you think is the best way
> for me to start exploring my own implementation. I can hack a little python.
>
> Regards,
> Karra
>

From aspamkiller at yandex.ru  Wed Dec 19 14:00:27 2012
From: aspamkiller at yandex.ru (=?UTF-8?B?0JTQnw==?=)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 15:00:27 +0200
Subject: [Mailman-Users] again postfix+aliases+virtual_domains
In-Reply-To: <50CE25D4.6080303@msapiro.net>
References: <20121216172023.f2b87c5458dcbb2014f46c7b@yandex.ru>
	<50CE0C58.70202@msapiro.net>
	<20121216210844.d7e09ac7308e4db63367cae5@yandex.ru>
	<50CE25D4.6080303@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <20121219150027.f819ff23fcc60a8d723ad8d8@yandex.ru>

Thank you all, good people, for help.
One more little step made me closer to check a tick for that enormous task in my organizer.
I got my list was recognized by my mail system.
I`ve attached the correct mm_cfg.
But.

I can`t anymore start using that list because
1. mailman just becam very leery.
2. I can`t view mylist information, nor any pages with list info, admin, etc.

So the behaviour is that - just after I send a letter - I receive, as admin, the approval request: "message need to be approved because contains a suspicious title".
Then I confirm a message it`s going as expected to all addresses. But, when I send another one, mailman again very don`t like my letter. And again and again.

And the main reason for me, to install the mailman - I want web-pages for people, so anybody can view and unsubscribe (or subscribe) the list if any.

====http://mail2.my-domain.com.ua/admindb/mylist
Not Found

The requested URL /admindb/mylist was not found on this server.

Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.
===

I`ve attached output of the "config_list -o - mylist" command
Also "list_members mylist" show me 4 addresses subscribed to em.
Also I`ve attached the part of httpd-vhosts.conf
Also, a global question, will webface of mailman work completely trough SSL?

Again thank you for your advices.

//DP
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: mylist.vars
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20121219/00d561ed/attachment.ksh>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: mylist.maillog.excerpt
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20121219/00d561ed/attachment-0001.ksh>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: httpd-vhosts.conf
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20121219/00d561ed/attachment-0002.ksh>

From shdwdrgn at sourpuss.net  Tue Dec 18 20:15:42 2012
From: shdwdrgn at sourpuss.net (Jeff Taylor)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 12:15:42 -0700
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Adding backup to multi-server config
Message-ID: <50D0C0DE.1020301@sourpuss.net>

I have been running mailman 2.1 from three servers with NFS sharing for
the past couple years, but due to a recent issue I did some digging and
found the suggestions for clustering at
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/2008-March/060753.html
(the post by Mark Sapiro detailing how to set up qrunner slices).  It
turns out the problem I was having was user error, so apparently mailman
*can* run on a low traffic site without issue... however since I now
have the proper changes made for qrunner, I have a new question.

My network consists of three primary servers running postfix and
mailman.  These are each essentially redundant machines, and I am in the
process of setting up a fourth machine in a VM for processing SMTP. 
What I am wondering about is if there would be a way to configure
qrunner on this VM so that it only processes messages which have been in
the queue for more than X minutes... basically a backup machine so that
if the server processes one of the slices goes offline for an extended
period, this backup server would make sure the message gets sent out.

>From an initial glance, I was thinking of having a configurable Delay
variable in mm_cfg.py, specified in seconds, then qrunner could use the
timestamp on the queued messages and only process the ones which were
older than Delay.  This backup machine would *not* have the qrunner
slices patch applied to it, as it should be processing any message that
doesn't get handled by the primary servers.

Does this sound plausible?  Unfortunately I know nothing about python,
nor the specifics of mailman's code, so I'm not sure if this would be an
easy change that someone could give me the code for... but any help is
appreciated.

From mark at msapiro.net  Thu Dec 20 07:47:18 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 22:47:18 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] again postfix+aliases+virtual_domains
In-Reply-To: <20121219150027.f819ff23fcc60a8d723ad8d8@yandex.ru>
References: <20121216172023.f2b87c5458dcbb2014f46c7b@yandex.ru>
	<50CE0C58.70202@msapiro.net>
	<20121216210844.d7e09ac7308e4db63367cae5@yandex.ru>
	<50CE25D4.6080303@msapiro.net>
	<20121219150027.f819ff23fcc60a8d723ad8d8@yandex.ru>
Message-ID: <50D2B476.5070202@msapiro.net>

On 12/19/2012 5:00 AM, ?? wrote:

> So the behaviour is that - just after I send a letter - I receive, as admin, the approval request: "message need to be approved because contains a suspicious title".
> Then I confirm a message it`s going as expected to all addresses. But, when I send another one, mailman again very don`t like my letter. And again and again.


What is the reason the messages are held?


> <VirtualHost *:80>
>     ServerName mail2.my-domain.com.ua
>     DocumentRoot /srv/mailman/
>     
> 	ScriptAlias / /srv/mailman/cgi-bin/
>  	Alias /mailman/ /srv/mailman/cgi-bin/


As far as your web issue is conncerned, the above should be
"ScriptAlias", not "Alias".

The preceding "ScriptAlias / /srv/mailman/cgi-bin/" should work for a
URL like http://mail2.my-domain.com.ua/admindb/mylist. What's in
Apache's error_log for the 404?

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From cwieland at uci.edu  Fri Dec 21 17:12:54 2012
From: cwieland at uci.edu (Con Wieland)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 08:12:54 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] log errors after restart
Message-ID: <7A2A1093-44AA-40A3-B784-DEFEDF5E72E1@uci.edu>

We recently had an electrical issue and had to shutdown our mailman server. It know is looping this log error.  Seems like it mail be a malformed message but I am not sure how to clear it. 

Any ideas?

thanks
Con Wieland
Office of Information Technology
University of California at Irvine


Dec 21 07:56:02 2012 (5770) Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/local/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Runner.py", line 100, in _oneloop
    msg, msgdata = self._switchboard.dequeue(filebase)
  File "/usr/local/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Switchboard.py", line 164, in dequeue
    msg = email.message_from_string(msg, Message.Message)
  File "/usr/local/mailman/pythonlib/email/__init__.py", line 51, in message_from_string
    return Parser(_class, strict=strict).parsestr(s)
  File "/usr/local/mailman/pythonlib/email/Parser.py", line 75, in parsestr
    return self.parse(StringIO(text), headersonly=headersonly)
  File "/usr/local/mailman/pythonlib/email/Parser.py", line 64, in parse
    self._parsebody(root, fp, firstbodyline)
  File "/usr/local/mailman/pythonlib/email/Parser.py", line 240, in _parsebody
    msgobj = self.parsestr(part)
  File "/usr/local/mailman/pythonlib/email/Parser.py", line 75, in parsestr
    return self.parse(StringIO(text), headersonly=headersonly)
  File "/usr/local/mailman/pythonlib/email/Parser.py", line 64, in parse
    self._parsebody(root, fp, firstbodyline)
  File "/usr/local/mailman/pythonlib/email/Parser.py", line 265, in _parsebody
    msg = self.parse(fp)
  File "/usr/local/mailman/pythonlib/email/Parser.py", line 64, in parse
    self._parsebody(root, fp, firstbodyline)
  File "/usr/local/mailman/pythonlib/email/Parser.py", line 206, in _parsebody
    raise Errors.BoundaryError(
BoundaryError: No terminating boundary and no trailing empty line


From mark at msapiro.net  Fri Dec 21 21:32:31 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 12:32:31 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] log errors after restart
In-Reply-To: <7A2A1093-44AA-40A3-B784-DEFEDF5E72E1@uci.edu>
Message-ID: <PC1993201212211232310953a7c3e9d8@MSAPIRO>

Con Wieland wrote:

>We recently had an electrical issue and had to shutdown our mailman server. It know is looping this log error.  Seems like it mail be a malformed message but I am not sure how to clear it. 


It is a corrupt queue entry.


>Dec 21 07:56:02 2012 (5770) Traceback (most recent call last):


5770 is the PID of the queue runner that is encountering this error.
The entry is in the queue of that runner. I.e. if it is
IncomingRunner, the queue is qfiles/in.

ps -fwp 5770

will show you the cammand that started the runner including its name.

The queue entry is the first *.pck file in name sequence in the
directory.


>  File "/usr/local/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Runner.py", line 100, in _oneloop
>    msg, msgdata = self._switchboard.dequeue(filebase)
>  File "/usr/local/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Switchboard.py", line 164, in dequeue
>    msg = email.message_from_string(msg, Message.Message)


Since the runner got this far, you should be able to see the actual
message via

bin/show_qfiles qfiles/x/y.pck

or

bin/dumpdb qfiles/x/y.pck

where x is the queue and y.pck is the entry.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From mark at msapiro.net  Fri Dec 21 21:55:31 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 12:55:31 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] log errors after restart
In-Reply-To: <PC1993201212211232310953a7c3e9d8@MSAPIRO>
Message-ID: <PC1993201212211255310437ecda41d4@MSAPIRO>

Mark Sapiro wrote:
>
>Since the runner got this far, you should be able to see the actual
>message via
>
>bin/show_qfiles qfiles/x/y.pck
>
>or
>
>bin/dumpdb qfiles/x/y.pck
>
>where x is the queue and y.pck is the entry.


I forgot to add, and maybe it's obvious anyway, but once you find the
offending queue entry, you can just remove it or move it aside.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From cwieland at uci.edu  Fri Dec 21 22:05:07 2012
From: cwieland at uci.edu (Con Wieland)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 13:05:07 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] log errors after restart
In-Reply-To: <FAA6EC5B-D355-4F68-8DA7-0B7FCC822BF0@uci.edu>
References: <PC1993201212211255310437ecda41d4@MSAPIRO>
	<FAA6EC5B-D355-4F68-8DA7-0B7FCC822BF0@uci.edu>
Message-ID: <6F674D3D-95F3-4C0E-AD7F-D7EAD6B42E8F@uci.edu>

In addition I just received this error:

Dec 21 13:01:56 2012 qrunner(683): Traceback (most recent call last):
Dec 21 13:01:56 2012 qrunner(683):   File "/usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner", line 278, in ?
Dec 21 13:01:56 2012 qrunner(683):      main()
Dec 21 13:01:56 2012 qrunner(683):   File "/usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner", line 238, in main
Dec 21 13:01:56 2012 qrunner(683):      qrunner.run()
Dec 21 13:01:56 2012 qrunner(683):   File "/usr/local/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Runner.py", line 71, in run
Dec 21 13:01:56 2012 qrunner(683):      filecnt = self._oneloop()
Dec 21 13:01:56 2012 qrunner(683):   File "/usr/local/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Runner.py", line 100, in _oneloop
Dec 21 13:01:56 2012 qrunner(683):      msg, msgdata = self._switchboard.dequeue(filebase)
Dec 21 13:01:56 2012 qrunner(683):   File "/usr/local/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Switchboard.py", line 150, in dequeue
Dec 21 13:01:56 2012 qrunner(683):      fp = open(filename)
Dec 21 13:01:56 2012 qrunner(683): IOError :  [Errno 2] No such file or directory: '/usr/local/mailman/qfiles/out/1356123714.5592401+1ec0a1f9ab8fdab3f923b9eb39d706046ac42b7b.pck' 

since it says there is no file I am not clear what I'm looking for here

On Dec 21, 2012, at 1:01 PM, Con Wieland wrote:

> Hi Mark,
> 
> The system got restarted again to return ait to it;s original power source before I got the original error tracked down. So when it restarted this time I got this error.  I was assuming I would find it in the in queue and just remove it but there was nothing in the in directory
> 
> con
> 
> 
> Dec 21 12:57:12 2012 (826) Ignoring unparseable message: 1350498399.3898871+2cdf0127ff3b85695d03ea16c34571045d928788
> Dec 21 12:57:12 2012 (826) Uncaught runner exception: No terminating boundary and no trailing empty line
> Dec 21 12:57:12 2012 (826) Traceback (most recent call last):
>  File "/usr/local/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Runner.py", line 100, in _oneloop
>    msg, msgdata = self._switchboard.dequeue(filebase)
>  File "/usr/local/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Switchboard.py", line 164, in dequeue
>    msg = email.message_from_string(msg, Message.Message)
>  File "/usr/local/mailman/pythonlib/email/__init__.py", line 51, in message_from_string
>    return Parser(_class, strict=strict).parsestr(s)
>  File "/usr/local/mailman/pythonlib/email/Parser.py", line 75, in parsestr
>    return self.parse(StringIO(text), headersonly=headersonly)
>  File "/usr/local/mailman/pythonlib/email/Parser.py", line 64, in parse
>    self._parsebody(root, fp, firstbodyline)
>  File "/usr/local/mailman/pythonlib/email/Parser.py", line 240, in _parsebody
>    msgobj = self.parsestr(part)
>  File "/usr/local/mailman/pythonlib/email/Parser.py", line 75, in parsestr
>    return self.parse(StringIO(text), headersonly=headersonly)
>  File "/usr/local/mailman/pythonlib/email/Parser.py", line 64, in parse
>    self._parsebody(root, fp, firstbodyline)
>  File "/usr/local/mailman/pythonlib/email/Parser.py", line 265, in _parsebody
>    msg = self.parse(fp)
>  File "/usr/local/mailman/pythonlib/email/Parser.py", line 64, in parse
>    self._parsebody(root, fp, firstbodyline)
>  File "/usr/local/mailman/pythonlib/email/Parser.py", line 206, in _parsebody
>    raise Errors.BoundaryError(
> BoundaryError: No terminating boundary and no trailing empty line
> 
> On Dec 21, 2012, at 12:55 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> 
>> Mark Sapiro wrote:
>>> 
>>> Since the runner got this far, you should be able to see the actual
>>> message via
>>> 
>>> bin/show_qfiles qfiles/x/y.pck
>>> 
>>> or
>>> 
>>> bin/dumpdb qfiles/x/y.pck
>>> 
>>> where x is the queue and y.pck is the entry.
>> 
>> 
>> I forgot to add, and maybe it's obvious anyway, but once you find the
>> offending queue entry, you can just remove it or move it aside.
>> 
>> -- 
>> Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
>> San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan
> 


From mark at msapiro.net  Fri Dec 21 22:20:55 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 13:20:55 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] log errors after restart
In-Reply-To: <6F674D3D-95F3-4C0E-AD7F-D7EAD6B42E8F@uci.edu>
Message-ID: <PC1993201212211320550484379be81b@MSAPIRO>

Con Wieland wrote:

>In addition I just received this error:
>
>Dec 21 13:01:56 2012 qrunner(683): Traceback (most recent call last):
>Dec 21 13:01:56 2012 qrunner(683):   File =
>"/usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner", line 278, in ?
>Dec 21 13:01:56 2012 qrunner(683):      main()
>Dec 21 13:01:56 2012 qrunner(683):   File =
>"/usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner", line 238, in main
>Dec 21 13:01:56 2012 qrunner(683):      qrunner.run()
>Dec 21 13:01:56 2012 qrunner(683):   File =
>"/usr/local/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Runner.py", line 71, in run
>Dec 21 13:01:56 2012 qrunner(683):      filecnt =3D self._oneloop()
>Dec 21 13:01:56 2012 qrunner(683):   File =
>"/usr/local/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Runner.py", line 100, in _oneloop
>Dec 21 13:01:56 2012 qrunner(683):      msg, msgdata =3D =
>self._switchboard.dequeue(filebase)
>Dec 21 13:01:56 2012 qrunner(683):   File =
>"/usr/local/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Switchboard.py", line 150, in dequeue
>Dec 21 13:01:56 2012 qrunner(683):      fp =3D open(filename)
>Dec 21 13:01:56 2012 qrunner(683): IOError :  [Errno 2] No such file or =
>directory: =
>'/usr/local/mailman/qfiles/out/1356123714.5592401+1ec0a1f9ab8fdab3f923b9eb=
>39d706046ac42b7b.pck'=20
>
>since it says there is no file I am not clear what I'm looking for here


This one says you have multiple qrunners processing the same slice of
the same queue. See the FAQ at <http://wiki.list.org/x/_4A9>.

Also note that this line number 164

  File "/usr/local/mailman/Mailman/Queue/Switchboard.py", line 164, in
dequeue
    msg = email.message_from_string(msg, Message.Message)

in your other traceback indicates Mailman 2.1.9. Recent versions handle
some of this much more gracefully.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From mark at msapiro.net  Fri Dec 21 22:27:51 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 13:27:51 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] log errors after restart
In-Reply-To: <FAA6EC5B-D355-4F68-8DA7-0B7FCC822BF0@uci.edu>
Message-ID: <PC1993201212211327510437ae2213e8@MSAPIRO>

Con Wieland wrote:
>
>The system got restarted again to return ait to it;s original power
>source before I got the original error tracked down. So when it
>restarted this time I got this error.  I was assuming I would find it in
>the in queue and just remove it but there was nothing in the in
>directory
>
>con
>
>
>Dec 21 12:57:12 2012 (826) Ignoring unparseable message: 1350498399.3898871+2cdf0127ff3b85695d03ea16c34571045d928788
>Dec 21 12:57:12 2012 (826) Uncaught runner exception: No terminating boundary and no trailing empty line
>Dec 21 12:57:12 2012 (826) Traceback (most recent call last):


Even in 2.1.9, these messages are removed when you see the "Ignoring
unparseable message:" entry. If you continue to see these, they are
probably malformed spam messages tha have nothing to do with the
outage and restart.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From ba.lan.fest.08 at gmail.com  Sat Dec 22 20:46:51 2012
From: ba.lan.fest.08 at gmail.com (BA lanfest)
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2012 11:46:51 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] How to properly nest a response from Gmail
Message-ID: <CAL-bOOivhcXK7bGuDLwYTeaM_vWK=NwBneL=_wxu6TPSYCdkZQ@mail.gmail.com>

I am a new member of a Mailman list.  This feels like a stupid question,
but the other day I tried to respond to a message, and it did not nest
properly.  It nested at the same level as the post I was responding to,
rather than under it (and this was not a case of nesting limit, as other
message did nest at the depth I desired).  I checked the "In-Reply-To"
header on my sent mail and sure enough it as replying to the Message-ID of
the email I wanted to nest under.  And yet it did not.  Any ideas?

From mark at msapiro.net  Sun Dec 23 19:16:14 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2012 10:16:14 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] How to properly nest a response from Gmail
In-Reply-To: <CAL-bOOivhcXK7bGuDLwYTeaM_vWK=NwBneL=_wxu6TPSYCdkZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <PC19932012122310161403597b274b75@MSAPIRO>

BA lanfest wrote:

>I am a new member of a Mailman list.  This feels like a stupid question,
>but the other day I tried to respond to a message, and it did not nest
>properly.  It nested at the same level as the post I was responding to,
>rather than under it (and this was not a case of nesting limit, as other
>message did nest at the depth I desired).


I assume by "nesting" you are referring to what I call "threading".


>I checked the "In-Reply-To"
>header on my sent mail and sure enough it as replying to the Message-ID of
>the email I wanted to nest under.  And yet it did not.  Any ideas?


Are you talking about the threaded view in the Mailman archives of the
list, or the "conversation" view in your own gmail folders?

If gmail, see the FAQ at <http://wiki.list.org/x/2IA9> and see
<http://support.google.com/mail/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=5900> which
may be relevant.

If Mailman's archives, there are various possibilities. One scenario
is, e.g., you post, someone replies to you with Cc: to the list, you
reply to the reply you receive directly and timing is such that your
reply reaches the list before the first reply, your reply does not get
threaded as a child of the first reply because the first reply wasn't
there when your reply got threaded.

Another possibility is a reply get's sent to you and then resent to the
list as a separate message. If you reply to the copy sent to you, your
reply is not a reply to the message in the list archive so it isn't
threaded as such.

Also, some Debian/Ubuntu Mailman packages contained a bad patch that
caused messages with hyphens in their Message-Id: to be indented too
much in the threaded archive index. This was never an issue with the
source distribution, and the issue that the Debian patch was
addressing was fixed in the source distribution as of Mailman 2.1.13.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From ba.lan.fest.08 at gmail.com  Sun Dec 23 21:19:31 2012
From: ba.lan.fest.08 at gmail.com (BA lanfest)
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2012 12:19:31 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] How to properly nest a response from Gmail
In-Reply-To: <PC19932012122310161403597b274b75@MSAPIRO>
References: <CAL-bOOivhcXK7bGuDLwYTeaM_vWK=NwBneL=_wxu6TPSYCdkZQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<PC19932012122310161403597b274b75@MSAPIRO>
Message-ID: <CAL-bOOjWOWVJrECBaB=W8rPqTAzYaTJAe3=M52A=mB6nFfetkw@mail.gmail.com>

MUCH thanks for the reply Mark.  I've been looking for help everywhere and
yours is the first response I've received.  I was referring to the archived
view threading on the web.

Another possibility is a reply get's sent to you and then resent to the
> list as a separate message. If you reply to the copy sent to you, your
> reply is not a reply to the message in the list archive so it isn't
> threaded as such.
>

I am pretty sure this is what happened.  When I replied to the first
message (which did not thread correctly), my subscription mode was digest
only so I was not getting individual messages, but I did get a message in
my inbox from the member I wanted to respond to, because he mailed me a
separate copy.  I replied to that, and I'm guessing like you said it had a
different Message-ID.

Later I changed my subscription to non-digest mode, and then when I replied
to one of those that I received (i.e. a message actually sent to the list
and not just me), it did thread properly.

However, the absolute weirdest thing is this.  Yesterday, I signed up for a
few other lists to run some tests.  One thing I tried was responding to an
archive message straight from the web using the <a href="mailto:someone">
link at the top of a message (my browser is configured to compose a Gmail
message when I click a link like that).  The first thing I noticed was that
even though that href link appears to ask your mail client to add an
"In-Reply-To" header, Gmail does not actually recognize that request, and
the Gmail message I sent to the list had no "In-Reply-To" header at all.
 However... the archive view STILL threaded my reply correctly, even
without that header!  So I went back to my "real list" and tried this same
thing, and it did not in fact work on this list (using the web reply link).
 So.. I do know now how to get my responses to thread properly on my real
list (I must have received a real copy in my inbox and reply to it from
there), but it is more of an academic curiosity why on some other list I
found, the threading still works even in the complete absence of
"In-Reply-To" headers.

Thanks again.

On the "test list" I was using

From ba.lan.fest.08 at gmail.com  Sun Dec 23 21:24:47 2012
From: ba.lan.fest.08 at gmail.com (BA lanfest)
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2012 12:24:47 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] How to properly nest a response from Gmail
In-Reply-To: <CAL-bOOjWOWVJrECBaB=W8rPqTAzYaTJAe3=M52A=mB6nFfetkw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAL-bOOivhcXK7bGuDLwYTeaM_vWK=NwBneL=_wxu6TPSYCdkZQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<PC19932012122310161403597b274b75@MSAPIRO>
	<CAL-bOOjWOWVJrECBaB=W8rPqTAzYaTJAe3=M52A=mB6nFfetkw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAL-bOOhpfYGrZLqGihsLgXbvb6aRs2cVXZFWM9w5ny4kWCzkyA@mail.gmail.com>

Actually, scratch that last part about correct threading in the absence of
"In-Reply-To" header.  I just re-checked, and that was actually only
threaded one level down, which was coincidentally the correct level, but is
also where replies end up going even if they should be deeper, when missing
the header.  Sorry for the confusion, I think I have it all sorted out now!
:-)

On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 12:19 PM, BA lanfest <ba.lan.fest.08 at gmail.com>wrote:

> MUCH thanks for the reply Mark.  I've been looking for help everywhere and
> yours is the first response I've received.  I was referring to the archived
> view threading on the web.
>
> Another possibility is a reply get's sent to you and then resent to the
>> list as a separate message. If you reply to the copy sent to you, your
>> reply is not a reply to the message in the list archive so it isn't
>> threaded as such.
>>
>
> I am pretty sure this is what happened.  When I replied to the first
> message (which did not thread correctly), my subscription mode was digest
> only so I was not getting individual messages, but I did get a message in
> my inbox from the member I wanted to respond to, because he mailed me a
> separate copy.  I replied to that, and I'm guessing like you said it had a
> different Message-ID.
>
> Later I changed my subscription to non-digest mode, and then when I
> replied to one of those that I received (i.e. a message actually sent to
> the list and not just me), it did thread properly.
>
> However, the absolute weirdest thing is this.  Yesterday, I signed up for
> a few other lists to run some tests.  One thing I tried was responding to
> an archive message straight from the web using the <a href="mailto:someone">
> link at the top of a message (my browser is configured to compose a Gmail
> message when I click a link like that).  The first thing I noticed was that
> even though that href link appears to ask your mail client to add an
> "In-Reply-To" header, Gmail does not actually recognize that request, and
> the Gmail message I sent to the list had no "In-Reply-To" header at all.
>  However... the archive view STILL threaded my reply correctly, even
> without that header!  So I went back to my "real list" and tried this same
> thing, and it did not in fact work on this list (using the web reply link).
>  So.. I do know now how to get my responses to thread properly on my real
> list (I must have received a real copy in my inbox and reply to it from
> there), but it is more of an academic curiosity why on some other list I
> found, the threading still works even in the complete absence of
> "In-Reply-To" headers.
>
> Thanks again.
>
> On the "test list" I was using
>

From mark at msapiro.net  Sun Dec 23 22:08:57 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2012 13:08:57 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Adding backup to multi-server config
In-Reply-To: <50D0C0DE.1020301@sourpuss.net>
References: <50D0C0DE.1020301@sourpuss.net>
Message-ID: <50D772E9.7070201@msapiro.net>

On 12/18/2012 11:15 AM, Jeff Taylor wrote:
> 
> From an initial glance, I was thinking of having a configurable Delay
> variable in mm_cfg.py, specified in seconds, then qrunner could use the
> timestamp on the queued messages and only process the ones which were
> older than Delay.  This backup machine would *not* have the qrunner
> slices patch applied to it, as it should be processing any message that
> doesn't get handled by the primary servers.
> 
> Does this sound plausible?


Yes.


> Unfortunately I know nothing about python,
> nor the specifics of mailman's code, so I'm not sure if this would be an
> easy change that someone could give me the code for... but any help is
> appreciated.


Assuming you have something like

QRUNNER_MESSAGE_IS_OLD_DELAY = minutes(2)

in mm_cfg.py for the backup machine and either no mention or something like

QRUNNER_MESSAGE_IS_OLD_DELAY = None

in mm_cfg.py/Defaults.py for the other machines, you could then patch
Mailman/Queue/Switchboard.py as follows:

Find the section in the definition of the files() method that looks like

            if ext <> extension:
                continue
            when, digest = filebase.split('+')
            # Throw out any files which don't match our bitrange.  BAW: test
            # performance and end-cases of this algorithm.  MAS: both
            # comparisons need to be <= to get complete range.
            if lower is None or (lower <= long(digest, 16) <= upper):
                key = float(when)
                while times.has_key(key):
                    key += DELTA
                times[key] = filebase

and add the following

        now = time.time()
        age = now - float(when)
        # Only process defined 'old' entries.
        if not (
                hasattr(mm_cfg, 'QRUNNER_MESSAGE_IS_OLD_DELAY') and
                mm_cfg.QRUNNER_MESSAGE_IS_OLD_DELAY and
                age > mm_cfg.QRUNNER_MESSAGE_IS_OLD_DELAY):
            continue

between

            when, digest = filebase.split('+')

and

            # Throw out any files which don't match our bitrange.  BAW: test

Also, Assuming you have patched mailmanctl as indicated at
<http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/2008-March/060753.html>,
the mm_cfg.py QRUNNERS entries for the backup machine should look like

QRUNNERS = [
    ('ArchRunner',     1,0,1), # messages for the archiver
    ...
    ]

i.e., the backup machine should be set up to be machine 0 of 1 machines.
The actual number of slices for a given runner on this machine (the
first '1' in '1,0,1' above) could be greater than 1, but you probably
don't want that.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From stephen at xemacs.org  Sun Dec 23 22:17:37 2012
From: stephen at xemacs.org (Stephen J. Turnbull)
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 06:17:37 +0900
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Adding backup to multi-server config
In-Reply-To: <50D772E9.7070201@msapiro.net>
References: <50D0C0DE.1020301@sourpuss.net>
	<50D772E9.7070201@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <87y5gov572.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>

Mark Sapiro writes:

Python is indentation-sensitive.  Do you really mean a dedent there
relative to the surrounding stanza?  It doesn't seem to be an artifact
of TABs or something like that.

 > Find the section in the definition of the files() method that looks like
 > 
 >             if ext <> extension:
 >                 continue
 >             when, digest = filebase.split('+')
 >             # Throw out any files which don't match our bitrange.  BAW: test
 >             # performance and end-cases of this algorithm.  MAS: both
 >             # comparisons need to be <= to get complete range.
 >             if lower is None or (lower <= long(digest, 16) <= upper):
 >                 key = float(when)
 >                 while times.has_key(key):
 >                     key += DELTA
 >                 times[key] = filebase
 > 
 > and add the following
 > 
 >         now = time.time()
 >         age = now - float(when)
 >         # Only process defined 'old' entries.
 >         if not (
 >                 hasattr(mm_cfg, 'QRUNNER_MESSAGE_IS_OLD_DELAY') and
 >                 mm_cfg.QRUNNER_MESSAGE_IS_OLD_DELAY and
 >                 age > mm_cfg.QRUNNER_MESSAGE_IS_OLD_DELAY):
 >             continue
 > 
 > between
 > 
 >             when, digest = filebase.split('+')
 > 
 > and
 > 
 >             # Throw out any files which don't match our bitrange.  BAW: test

From mark at msapiro.net  Sun Dec 23 22:48:25 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2012 13:48:25 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] How to properly nest a response from Gmail
In-Reply-To: <CAL-bOOjWOWVJrECBaB=W8rPqTAzYaTJAe3=M52A=mB6nFfetkw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <PC1993201212231348250656198be8a9@MSAPIRO>

BA lanfest wrote:
>
>However, the absolute weirdest thing is this.  Yesterday, I signed up for a
>few other lists to run some tests.  One thing I tried was responding to an
>archive message straight from the web using the <a href="mailto:someone">
>link at the top of a message (my browser is configured to compose a Gmail
>message when I click a link like that).  The first thing I noticed was that
>even though that href link appears to ask your mail client to add an
>"In-Reply-To" header, Gmail does not actually recognize that request, and
>the Gmail message I sent to the list had no "In-Reply-To" header at all.


Bummer.  Yet another thing to not like about gmail ...


> However... the archive view STILL threaded my reply correctly, even
>without that header!  So I went back to my "real list" and tried this same
>thing, and it did not in fact work on this list (using the web reply link).

(Above subsequently noted to not be completely correct)


Threading in Mailman's pipermail archive was designed to identify the
parent of the current message as follows:

1) If the current message has an In-Reply-To: header, the parent is the
message in the archive with Message-ID: = this message's In-Reply-To:,
or if no such message exists, this message has no parent.

2) If the current message still has no parent, but it has a References:
header, and one or more of the IDs in the References: header is = the
Message-ID of a message in the archive, the parent of this message is
the newest referenced message. If none of the referenced messages are
in the archive, this message has no parent.

3) If the current message still has no parent, it's parent is the
oldest message in the archive with a matching subject, if any.

In the above, "in the archive" really means in the archive for the
current month or whatever the archive frequency is. Also, step 3),
threading by subject, was broken prior to Mailman 2.1.14 and may still
not be completely fixed. See
<https://bugs.launchpad.net/mailman/+bug/266572>.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From mark at msapiro.net  Sun Dec 23 22:55:44 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2012 13:55:44 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Adding backup to multi-server config
In-Reply-To: <87y5gov572.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <PC199320121223135544017181a7e6d7@MSAPIRO>

Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:

>Mark Sapiro writes:
>
>Python is indentation-sensitive.  Do you really mean a dedent there
>relative to the surrounding stanza?  It doesn't seem to be an artifact
>of TABs or something like that.


No, it's just lack of careful typing and proof-reading on my part.
(Also, a clue that what I wrote was inadequately tested at best).


> > Find the section in the definition of the files() method that looks like
> > 
> >             if ext <> extension:
> >                 continue
> >             when, digest = filebase.split('+')
> >             # Throw out any files which don't match our bitrange.  BAW: test
> >             # performance and end-cases of this algorithm.  MAS: both
> >             # comparisons need to be <= to get complete range.
> >             if lower is None or (lower <= long(digest, 16) <= upper):
> >                 key = float(when)
> >                 while times.has_key(key):
> >                     key += DELTA
> >                 times[key] = filebase
> > 
> > and add the following
> > 


As Stephen notes (thank you), this code block should be indented an
additional four spaces.


> >         now = time.time()
> >         age = now - float(when)
> >         # Only process defined 'old' entries.
> >         if not (
> >                 hasattr(mm_cfg, 'QRUNNER_MESSAGE_IS_OLD_DELAY') and
> >                 mm_cfg.QRUNNER_MESSAGE_IS_OLD_DELAY and
> >                 age > mm_cfg.QRUNNER_MESSAGE_IS_OLD_DELAY):
> >             continue


So that the first 4 lines line up with the 'between' lines below and
the remaining lines are also appropriately indented.


> > between
> > 
> >             when, digest = filebase.split('+')
> > 
> > and
> > 
> >             # Throw out any files which don't match our bitrange.  BAW: test

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From stephen at xemacs.org  Sun Dec 23 23:53:54 2012
From: stephen at xemacs.org (Stephen J. Turnbull)
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 07:53:54 +0900
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Adding backup to multi-server config
In-Reply-To: <PC199320121223135544017181a7e6d7@MSAPIRO>
References: <87y5gov572.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
	<PC199320121223135544017181a7e6d7@MSAPIRO>
Message-ID: <87obhkv0ql.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>

Mark Sapiro writes:

 > No, it's just lack of careful typing and proof-reading on my part.
 > (Also, a clue that what I wrote was inadequately tested at best).

Hey, I wouldn't worry about it.  You play more games of the season
than Ichiro and you bat about .950!<wink/>

From shdwdrgn at sourpuss.net  Sun Dec 23 23:36:17 2012
From: shdwdrgn at sourpuss.net (Jeff Taylor)
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2012 15:36:17 -0700
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Adding backup to multi-server config
In-Reply-To: <PC199320121223135544017181a7e6d7@MSAPIRO>
References: <PC199320121223135544017181a7e6d7@MSAPIRO>
Message-ID: <50D78761.2040306@sourpuss.net>

No problems, I'm at least aware of the indented nature of python.  I'll
get this code added in later in the week and give it a trial run, see
what happens.  Thanks!


On 12/23/2012 02:55 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>
>> Mark Sapiro writes:
>>
>> Python is indentation-sensitive.  Do you really mean a dedent there
>> relative to the surrounding stanza?  It doesn't seem to be an artifact
>> of TABs or something like that.
>
> No, it's just lack of careful typing and proof-reading on my part.
> (Also, a clue that what I wrote was inadequately tested at best).
>
>
>>> Find the section in the definition of the files() method that looks like
>>>
>>>             if ext <> extension:
>>>                 continue
>>>             when, digest = filebase.split('+')
>>>             # Throw out any files which don't match our bitrange.  BAW: test
>>>             # performance and end-cases of this algorithm.  MAS: both
>>>             # comparisons need to be <= to get complete range.
>>>             if lower is None or (lower <= long(digest, 16) <= upper):
>>>                 key = float(when)
>>>                 while times.has_key(key):
>>>                     key += DELTA
>>>                 times[key] = filebase
>>>
>>> and add the following
>>>
>
> As Stephen notes (thank you), this code block should be indented an
> additional four spaces.
>
>
>>>         now = time.time()
>>>         age = now - float(when)
>>>         # Only process defined 'old' entries.
>>>         if not (
>>>                 hasattr(mm_cfg, 'QRUNNER_MESSAGE_IS_OLD_DELAY') and
>>>                 mm_cfg.QRUNNER_MESSAGE_IS_OLD_DELAY and
>>>                 age > mm_cfg.QRUNNER_MESSAGE_IS_OLD_DELAY):
>>>             continue
>
> So that the first 4 lines line up with the 'between' lines below and
> the remaining lines are also appropriately indented.
>
>
>>> between
>>>
>>>             when, digest = filebase.split('+')
>>>
>>> and
>>>
>>>             # Throw out any files which don't match our bitrange.  BAW: test


From cwieland at uci.edu  Mon Dec 24 16:48:59 2012
From: cwieland at uci.edu (Con Wieland)
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 07:48:59 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] log errors after restart
In-Reply-To: <PC1993201212211327510437ae2213e8@MSAPIRO>
References: <PC1993201212211327510437ae2213e8@MSAPIRO>
Message-ID: <AEA74659-B218-4DC1-A428-B3A181E4EA65@uci.edu>

More issues.  I had several of these messages:

Dec 24 06:57:23 2012 (17125) Ignoring unparseable message: 1354049125.0870931+f5e280e91f2ed298fb5
62d3690311d1e47d24dee

I found them in the bounce directory and removed them. I then restarted mailman with no errors but I noticed that I now have a lot of qfiles that don't seem to be getting processed.

/usr/local/mailman/qfiles/archive 153
/usr/local/mailman/qfiles/bad	542

I'm not sure what to do but it seems like something isn't right although it processes my test mail correctly.

Any ideas would be appreciated.
con


I found them in the ~mailman/qfiles/bounces and removed them and restarted mailman. Now I get no more errors but I have 
On Dec 21, 2012, at 1:27 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:

> Con Wieland wrote:
>> 
>> The system got restarted again to return ait to it;s original power
>> source before I got the original error tracked down. So when it
>> restarted this time I got this error.  I was assuming I would find it in
>> the in queue and just remove it but there was nothing in the in
>> directory
>> 
>> con
>> 
>> 
>> Dec 21 12:57:12 2012 (826) Ignoring unparseable message: 1350498399.3898871+2cdf0127ff3b85695d03ea16c34571045d928788
>> Dec 21 12:57:12 2012 (826) Uncaught runner exception: No terminating boundary and no trailing empty line
>> Dec 21 12:57:12 2012 (826) Traceback (most recent call last):
> 
> 
> Even in 2.1.9, these messages are removed when you see the "Ignoring
> unparseable message:" entry. If you continue to see these, they are
> probably malformed spam messages tha have nothing to do with the
> outage and restart.
> 
> -- 
> Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
> San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
> Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
> Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
> Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
> Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/cwieland%40uci.edu


From mark at msapiro.net  Mon Dec 24 17:46:02 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 08:46:02 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] log errors after restart
In-Reply-To: <AEA74659-B218-4DC1-A428-B3A181E4EA65@uci.edu>
References: <PC1993201212211327510437ae2213e8@MSAPIRO>
	<AEA74659-B218-4DC1-A428-B3A181E4EA65@uci.edu>
Message-ID: <50D886CA.2030409@msapiro.net>

On 12/24/2012 7:48 AM, Con Wieland wrote:
> More issues.  I had several of these messages:
> 
> Dec 24 06:57:23 2012 (17125) Ignoring unparseable message: 1354049125.0870931+f5e280e91f2ed298fb5
> 62d3690311d1e47d24dee
> 
> I found them in the bounce directory and removed them. I then restarted mailman with no errors but I noticed that I now have a lot of qfiles that don't seem to be getting processed.


So they were bounces that were unparseable for some reason. Possibly a
spam post gets rejected or held and a notice is sent to the probably
spoofed sender and that bounces. Except that the above message id is not
a Mailman generated ID as would be found in a reject or held message
notice. Also, you shouldn't find any queue entry corresponding the above
log message, because that message says the queue entry was removed and
ignored.


> /usr/local/mailman/qfiles/archive 153


Is ArchRunner running? What are the extensions on the names of these 153
entries.


> /usr/local/mailman/qfiles/bad	542


The 'bad' queue does not get processed. This is where unparseable
messages are preserved for inspection (with a .psv extension) and where
messages with no content after content filtering are saved if the list's
filter_action = Preserve.

See the documention of settings QRUNNER_SAVE_BAD_MESSAGES,
BAD_SHUNT_STALE_AFTER and BAD_SHUNT_ARCHIVE_DIRECTORY in the "Qrunner
defaults" section of Defaults.py for more info, although if yours is an
older Mailman, you may not have all these features/settings.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From cwieland at uci.edu  Mon Dec 24 17:53:03 2012
From: cwieland at uci.edu (Con Wieland)
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 08:53:03 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] log errors after restart
In-Reply-To: <50D886CA.2030409@msapiro.net>
References: <PC1993201212211327510437ae2213e8@MSAPIRO>
	<AEA74659-B218-4DC1-A428-B3A181E4EA65@uci.edu>
	<50D886CA.2030409@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <17A39E32-98AF-4577-9E5F-AEB72D0B4D5A@uci.edu>


On Dec 24, 2012, at 8:46 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote:

> On 12/24/2012 7:48 AM, Con Wieland wrote:
>> More issues.  I had several of these messages:
>> 
>> Dec 24 06:57:23 2012 (17125) Ignoring unparseable message: 1354049125.0870931+f5e280e91f2ed298fb5
>> 62d3690311d1e47d24dee
>> 
>> I found them in the bounce directory and removed them. I then restarted mailman with no errors but I noticed that I now have a lot of qfiles that don't seem to be getting processed.
> 
> 
> So they were bounces that were unparseable for some reason. Possibly a
> spam post gets rejected or held and a notice is sent to the probably
> spoofed sender and that bounces. Except that the above message id is not
> a Mailman generated ID as would be found in a reject or held message
> notice. Also, you shouldn't find any queue entry corresponding the above
> log message, because that message says the queue entry was removed and
> ignored.
> 
> 
>> /usr/local/mailman/qfiles/archive 153
> 
> 
> Is ArchRunner running? What are the extensions on the names of these 153
> entries.

looks to be:

ps -ef |grep -i qrunner
 mailman 17786 17123  0 07:41:53 ?        0:00 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=RetryRunner:0:1 -
 mailman 17785 17123  0 07:41:53 ?        0:00 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=NewsRunner:0:1 -s
 mailman 17781 17123  0 07:41:52 ?        0:00 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=BounceRunner:0:1 
 mailman 17783 17123  0 07:41:52 ?        0:05 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=OutgoingRunner:0:
 mailman 17780 17123  0 07:41:52 ?        0:00 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=CommandRunner:0:1
 mailman 17782 17123  0 07:41:52 ?        0:04 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=IncomingRunner:0:
 mailman 17784 17123  0 07:41:52 ?        0:03 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=VirginRunner:0:1 


the file extensions are .pck

thanks for looking
con


> 
> 
>> /usr/local/mailman/qfiles/bad	542
> 
> 
> The 'bad' queue does not get processed. This is where unparseable
> messages are preserved for inspection (with a .psv extension) and where
> messages with no content after content filtering are saved if the list's
> filter_action = Preserve.
> 
> See the documention of settings QRUNNER_SAVE_BAD_MESSAGES,
> BAD_SHUNT_STALE_AFTER and BAD_SHUNT_ARCHIVE_DIRECTORY in the "Qrunner
> defaults" section of Defaults.py for more info, although if yours is an
> older Mailman, you may not have all these features/settings.
> 
> -- 
> Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
> San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From mark at msapiro.net  Mon Dec 24 17:58:30 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 08:58:30 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] log errors after restart
In-Reply-To: <17A39E32-98AF-4577-9E5F-AEB72D0B4D5A@uci.edu>
References: <PC1993201212211327510437ae2213e8@MSAPIRO>
	<AEA74659-B218-4DC1-A428-B3A181E4EA65@uci.edu>
	<50D886CA.2030409@msapiro.net>
	<17A39E32-98AF-4577-9E5F-AEB72D0B4D5A@uci.edu>
Message-ID: <50D889B6.80802@msapiro.net>

On 12/24/2012 8:53 AM, Con Wieland wrote:
> 
> On Dec 24, 2012, at 8:46 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
>>
>> Is ArchRunner running? What are the extensions on the names of these 153
>> entries.
> 
> looks to be:
> 
> ps -ef |grep -i qrunner
>  mailman 17786 17123  0 07:41:53 ?        0:00 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=RetryRunner:0:1 -
>  mailman 17785 17123  0 07:41:53 ?        0:00 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=NewsRunner:0:1 -s
>  mailman 17781 17123  0 07:41:52 ?        0:00 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=BounceRunner:0:1 
>  mailman 17783 17123  0 07:41:52 ?        0:05 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=OutgoingRunner:0:
>  mailman 17780 17123  0 07:41:52 ?        0:00 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=CommandRunner:0:1
>  mailman 17782 17123  0 07:41:52 ?        0:04 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=IncomingRunner:0:
>  mailman 17784 17123  0 07:41:52 ?        0:03 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=VirginRunner:0:1 


Huh? I don't see ArchRunner in the above list. Check Mailman's 'qrunner'
and 'error' logs for clues as to why it's not.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From cwieland at uci.edu  Mon Dec 24 18:07:10 2012
From: cwieland at uci.edu (Con Wieland)
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 09:07:10 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] log errors after restart
In-Reply-To: <50D889B6.80802@msapiro.net>
References: <PC1993201212211327510437ae2213e8@MSAPIRO>
	<AEA74659-B218-4DC1-A428-B3A181E4EA65@uci.edu>
	<50D886CA.2030409@msapiro.net>
	<17A39E32-98AF-4577-9E5F-AEB72D0B4D5A@uci.edu>
	<50D889B6.80802@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <54B3DCF8-DE8E-47FE-92FE-B09120A21D91@uci.edu>


On Dec 24, 2012, at 8:58 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote:

> On 12/24/2012 8:53 AM, Con Wieland wrote:
>> 
>> On Dec 24, 2012, at 8:46 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
>>> 
>>> Is ArchRunner running? What are the extensions on the names of these 153
>>> entries.
>> 
>> looks to be:
>> 
>> ps -ef |grep -i qrunner
>> mailman 17786 17123  0 07:41:53 ?        0:00 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=RetryRunner:0:1 -
>> mailman 17785 17123  0 07:41:53 ?        0:00 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=NewsRunner:0:1 -s
>> mailman 17781 17123  0 07:41:52 ?        0:00 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=BounceRunner:0:1 
>> mailman 17783 17123  0 07:41:52 ?        0:05 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=OutgoingRunner:0:
>> mailman 17780 17123  0 07:41:52 ?        0:00 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=CommandRunner:0:1
>> mailman 17782 17123  0 07:41:52 ?        0:04 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=IncomingRunner:0:
>> mailman 17784 17123  0 07:41:52 ?        0:03 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=VirginRunner:0:1 
> 
> 
> Huh? I don't see ArchRunner in the above list. Check Mailman's 'qrunner'
> and 'error' logs for clues as to why it's not.

Here's all I can find from the last restart, this is from the qrunner log  nothing in the error log:

qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17549) RetryRunner qrunner caught SIGINT.  Stopping.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17549) RetryRunner qrunner exiting.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17550) NewsRunner qrunner caught SIGINT.  Stopping.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17550) NewsRunner qrunner exiting.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17551) VirginRunner qrunner caught SIGINT.  Stopping.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17551) VirginRunner qrunner exiting.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17552) OutgoingRunner qrunner caught SIGINT.  Stopping.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17552) OutgoingRunner qrunner exiting.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17553) CommandRunner qrunner caught SIGINT.  Stopping.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17553) CommandRunner qrunner exiting.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17554) IncomingRunner qrunner caught SIGINT.  Stopping.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17554) IncomingRunner qrunner exiting.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17555) BounceRunner qrunner caught SIGINT.  Stopping.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17555) BounceRunner qrunner exiting.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17123) Master qrunner detected subprocess exit
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17123) Master qrunner detected subprocess exit
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17123) Master qrunner detected subprocess exit
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17123) Master qrunner detected subprocess exit
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:52 2012 (17123) Master qrunner detected subprocess exit
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:52 2012 (17123) Master qrunner detected subprocess exit
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:52 2012 (17780) CommandRunner qrunner started.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:52 2012 (17123) Master qrunner detected subprocess exit
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:53 2012 (17781) BounceRunner qrunner started.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:53 2012 (17782) IncomingRunner qrunner started.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:53 2012 (17783) OutgoingRunner qrunner started.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:53 2012 (17784) VirginRunner qrunner started.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:53 2012 (17785) NewsRunner qrunner started.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:53 2012 (17786) RetryRunner qrunner started.


So no problem removing these once I peruse them for possible causes, right?


> /usr/local/mailman/qfiles/bad	542

con


> 
> -- 
> Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
> San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan




From cwieland at uci.edu  Mon Dec 24 18:19:06 2012
From: cwieland at uci.edu (Con Wieland)
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 09:19:06 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] log errors after restart
In-Reply-To: <50D889B6.80802@msapiro.net>
References: <PC1993201212211327510437ae2213e8@MSAPIRO>
	<AEA74659-B218-4DC1-A428-B3A181E4EA65@uci.edu>
	<50D886CA.2030409@msapiro.net>
	<17A39E32-98AF-4577-9E5F-AEB72D0B4D5A@uci.edu>
	<50D889B6.80802@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <E34C9F5D-54E6-4264-A3A8-3661A94600F0@uci.edu>

so the other thing I just noticed, which I think is what your getting at is that 

--runner=ArchRunner:0:1 -s

is not running and I notice it is on another install of mailman that I have. But I can't find any thing error wise other than the below. Is there a way to start it manually (maybe that would produce an error)

con

On Dec 24, 2012, at 8:58 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote:

> On 12/24/2012 8:53 AM, Con Wieland wrote:
>> 
>> On Dec 24, 2012, at 8:46 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
>>> 
>>> Is ArchRunner running? What are the extensions on the names of these 153
>>> entries.
>> 
>> looks to be:
>> 
>> ps -ef |grep -i qrunner
>> mailman 17786 17123  0 07:41:53 ?        0:00 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=RetryRunner:0:1 -
>> mailman 17785 17123  0 07:41:53 ?        0:00 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=NewsRunner:0:1 -s
>> mailman 17781 17123  0 07:41:52 ?        0:00 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=BounceRunner:0:1 
>> mailman 17783 17123  0 07:41:52 ?        0:05 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=OutgoingRunner:0:
>> mailman 17780 17123  0 07:41:52 ?        0:00 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=CommandRunner:0:1
>> mailman 17782 17123  0 07:41:52 ?        0:04 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=IncomingRunner:0:
>> mailman 17784 17123  0 07:41:52 ?        0:03 /usr/local/bin/python /usr/local/mailman/bin/qrunner --runner=VirginRunner:0:1 
> 
> 
> Huh? I don't see ArchRunner in the above list. Check Mailman's 'qrunner'
> and 'error' logs for clues as to why it's not.

Here's all I can find from the last restart, this is from the qrunner log  nothing in the error log:

qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17549) RetryRunner qrunner caught SIGINT.  Stopping.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17549) RetryRunner qrunner exiting.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17550) NewsRunner qrunner caught SIGINT.  Stopping.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17550) NewsRunner qrunner exiting.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17551) VirginRunner qrunner caught SIGINT.  Stopping.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17551) VirginRunner qrunner exiting.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17552) OutgoingRunner qrunner caught SIGINT.  Stopping.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17552) OutgoingRunner qrunner exiting.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17553) CommandRunner qrunner caught SIGINT.  Stopping.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17553) CommandRunner qrunner exiting.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17554) IncomingRunner qrunner caught SIGINT.  Stopping.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17554) IncomingRunner qrunner exiting.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17555) BounceRunner qrunner caught SIGINT.  Stopping.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17555) BounceRunner qrunner exiting.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17123) Master qrunner detected subprocess exit
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17123) Master qrunner detected subprocess exit
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17123) Master qrunner detected subprocess exit
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:51 2012 (17123) Master qrunner detected subprocess exit
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:52 2012 (17123) Master qrunner detected subprocess exit
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:52 2012 (17123) Master qrunner detected subprocess exit
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:52 2012 (17780) CommandRunner qrunner started.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:52 2012 (17123) Master qrunner detected subprocess exit
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:53 2012 (17781) BounceRunner qrunner started.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:53 2012 (17782) IncomingRunner qrunner started.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:53 2012 (17783) OutgoingRunner qrunner started.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:53 2012 (17784) VirginRunner qrunner started.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:53 2012 (17785) NewsRunner qrunner started.
qrunner:Dec 24 07:41:53 2012 (17786) RetryRunner qrunner started.


So no problem removing these once I peruse them for possible causes, right?


> /usr/local/mailman/qfiles/bad	542

con


> 
> -- 
> Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
> San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan




From mark at msapiro.net  Mon Dec 24 18:28:24 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 09:28:24 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] log errors after restart
In-Reply-To: <E34C9F5D-54E6-4264-A3A8-3661A94600F0@uci.edu>
References: <PC1993201212211327510437ae2213e8@MSAPIRO>
	<AEA74659-B218-4DC1-A428-B3A181E4EA65@uci.edu>
	<50D886CA.2030409@msapiro.net>
	<17A39E32-98AF-4577-9E5F-AEB72D0B4D5A@uci.edu>
	<50D889B6.80802@msapiro.net>
	<E34C9F5D-54E6-4264-A3A8-3661A94600F0@uci.edu>
Message-ID: <50D890B8.6080009@msapiro.net>

On 12/24/2012 9:19 AM, Con Wieland wrote:
> so the other thing I just noticed, which I think is what your getting at is that 
> 
> --runner=ArchRunner:0:1 -s
> 
> is not running and I notice it is on another install of mailman that I have. But I can't find any thing error wise other than the below. Is there a way to start it manually (maybe that would produce an error)


You can start it manually, but don't. Instead of 'restarting' Mailman
which won't restart ArchRunner if ArchRunner has already exceeded it's
died and autorestarted 10 times limit some time ago, 'stop' Mailman,
make sure all the runners exit and then 'start' Mailman.

Also, don't remove entries from the archive queue before determining the
issue with ArchRunner. These are messages to be archived and if you
remove them, they won't be archived.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From cwieland at uci.edu  Mon Dec 24 21:31:23 2012
From: cwieland at uci.edu (Con Wieland)
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 12:31:23 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] log errors after restart
In-Reply-To: <50D890B8.6080009@msapiro.net>
References: <PC1993201212211327510437ae2213e8@MSAPIRO>
	<AEA74659-B218-4DC1-A428-B3A181E4EA65@uci.edu>
	<50D886CA.2030409@msapiro.net>
	<17A39E32-98AF-4577-9E5F-AEB72D0B4D5A@uci.edu>
	<50D889B6.80802@msapiro.net>
	<E34C9F5D-54E6-4264-A3A8-3661A94600F0@uci.edu>
	<50D890B8.6080009@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <F9691BAB-5F8F-444E-9B83-771C87155584@uci.edu>

Thanks Mark, that did the trick, ArchRunner started right up without any errors.  Fingers crossed the only thing left are the 542 messages in qfiles/bad.  They mostly seem to just be message headers that were bounces or the body was omitted.... Can they safely be deleted?

con

 
On Dec 24, 2012, at 9:28 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote:

> On 12/24/2012 9:19 AM, Con Wieland wrote:
>> so the other thing I just noticed, which I think is what your getting at is that 
>> 
>> --runner=ArchRunner:0:1 -s
>> 
>> is not running and I notice it is on another install of mailman that I have. But I can't find any thing error wise other than the below. Is there a way to start it manually (maybe that would produce an error)
> 
> 
> You can start it manually, but don't. Instead of 'restarting' Mailman
> which won't restart ArchRunner if ArchRunner has already exceeded it's
> died and autorestarted 10 times limit some time ago, 'stop' Mailman,
> make sure all the runners exit and then 'start' Mailman.
> 
> Also, don't remove entries from the archive queue before determining the
> issue with ArchRunner. These are messages to be archived and if you
> remove them, they won't be archived.
> 
> -- 
> Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
> San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From mark at msapiro.net  Mon Dec 24 23:51:39 2012
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 14:51:39 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] log errors after restart
In-Reply-To: <F9691BAB-5F8F-444E-9B83-771C87155584@uci.edu>
References: <PC1993201212211327510437ae2213e8@MSAPIRO>
	<AEA74659-B218-4DC1-A428-B3A181E4EA65@uci.edu>
	<50D886CA.2030409@msapiro.net>
	<17A39E32-98AF-4577-9E5F-AEB72D0B4D5A@uci.edu>
	<50D889B6.80802@msapiro.net>
	<E34C9F5D-54E6-4264-A3A8-3661A94600F0@uci.edu>
	<50D890B8.6080009@msapiro.net>
	<F9691BAB-5F8F-444E-9B83-771C87155584@uci.edu>
Message-ID: <50D8DC7B.90601@msapiro.net>

On 12/24/2012 12:31 PM, Con Wieland wrote:
> Thanks Mark, that did the trick, ArchRunner started right up without any errors.  Fingers crossed the only thing left are the 542 messages in qfiles/bad.  They mostly seem to just be message headers that were bounces or the body was omitted.... Can they safely be deleted?


In your case, the messages in the 'bad' queue are almost certainly all
messages that had no content left after content filtering on lists for
which filter_action = Preserve. Yes, you can just remove them.

Further, since no one is apparently pro-actively looking for these, I
suggest setting

OWNERS_CAN_PRESERVE_FILTERED_MESSAGES = No

in mm_cfg.py so that these messages will not be moved to the 'bad' queue
in the future.

You could also run something like:

#!/bin/bash
cd /path/to/mailman
for list in `mmp/bin/list_lists --bare`; do
 echo $list
 mmp/bin/config_list -o - $list | grep "filter_action = 3"
done

to find those lists with filter_action = Preserve and then you can
change them to one of the other settings.

As far as ArchRunner is concerned, if your logs go back far enough, you
will find messages in the 'qrunner' log about ArchRunner dieing and
restarting until its restart limit was reached and possibly
corresponding 'error' log messages. This may have been due to corrupt
files after the power outage hard crash, or it may be something that
should be investigated.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From frankly3d at gmail.com  Fri Dec 28 13:47:33 2012
From: frankly3d at gmail.com (Frank Murphy)
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2012 12:47:33 +0000
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman  2.1.12
Message-ID: <50dd94e6.1095cc0a.5b94.65f7@mx.google.com>

Mailman 2.1.12


New to Mailman, and indeed python.

looking through the Admin Interface.
I'm trying to work out where
to place following:

Subject must contain: "from" (the word)
Mail Body must contain: "Reporter: @ (word Reporter: + @ symbol)

Even http://wiki.list.org/display/DOC/3+List+administrator+tasks
hasn't shed light for me. 
My grey logic processor is borked.

-- 
Regards,
Frank


From pcanterb at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 27 20:00:01 2012
From: pcanterb at yahoo.com (Philip R. Canterbury)
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2012 11:00:01 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Mailman-Users] need help with mailman mail is coming into my spam
	box
Message-ID: <1356634801.25071.YahooMailNeo@web162101.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

mail is coming into my spam box? I don't know if this is problem for all the people on my list, but is their something i can change?

?
Philip Canterbury
De Funiak Springs, FL

http://www.pcsbypc.com
http://www.prchosting.com
http://www.canterburygenealogy.com
http://www.compusoftoftampabay.com
?
Ham Callsign: KG4RQR

From stephen at xemacs.org  Sat Dec 29 03:51:05 2012
From: stephen at xemacs.org (Stephen J. Turnbull)
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2012 11:51:05 +0900
Subject: [Mailman-Users] need help with mailman mail is coming into my
	spam	box
In-Reply-To: <1356634801.25071.YahooMailNeo@web162101.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
References: <1356634801.25071.YahooMailNeo@web162101.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <87obhdo9k6.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>

Philip R. Canterbury writes:

 > mail is coming into my spam box? I don't know if this is problem
 > for all the people on my list, but is their something i can change?

Stop using Yahoo for your mail, as far as your personal situation
goes.  I'm only half-joking -- I'm in the fortunate position of being
able to require exactly that, as almost all of my subscribers have
multiple addresses, at least one of which is not a freemail service.

What the list can do depends on the ISP and the MUA.  If the spam box
you are talking about is on yahoo.com, you can probably at least
temporarily relieve the problem by registering your list with Yahoo.
However, you need to do that kind of thing with every mail service
your users use, and of course you can't find out until they complain.
And if they are subscribed from their employers or schools, in most
cases they will need to deal with their own bureaucracy.

The most likely cause of getting classed as spam at the major freemail
services and ISPs (based on past mailman-users posts) is probably that
some of your users don't distinguish among "delete message",
"unsubscribe list", and "report spam", using "report spam" for all
three.

Also, you should check that indeed no spam *at all* is getting through
your list.  Even one true spam will trigger some services' blacklists,
and you will go through hell (ie, huge amounts of bureaucratic
registering and proving your worthiness to send mail to their
customers) trying to get back on their good sides.  If you *did* pass
*any* spam, or even a legitimate post from a user selling something,
be prepared to explain what you are doing to stop that in the future,
or demonstrate that your double opt-in process informs the users at
every stage that your list includes email solicitations (ie, if the
user didn't explicitly acknowledge they want them, they *are* UCE).

HTH

Steve

From barry at list.org  Mon Dec 31 20:29:13 2012
From: barry at list.org (Barry Warsaw)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2012 14:29:13 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] RELEASED: GNU Mailman 3.0 beta 3
Message-ID: <20121231142913.31be8232@anarchist>

Hello friends of Mailman!

    I said I played this song so many times before
    That the melody keeps repeating

Time for my usual "sneak one in before the new year" release!  I'm
happy to announce the third beta release of the core Mailman 3.0
engine.  Mailman 3.0b3 is code named "Here Again".

You can download GNU Mailman 3.0b3 from Launchpad or the Python
Cheeseshop:

    https://launchpad.net/mailman
    http://pypi.python.org/pypi/mailman

The GNU Mailman documentation is available online at:

    http://packages.python.org/mailman

Alpha releases of Postorius, our new web ui are available at:

    https://launchpad.net/postorius
    http://pypi.python.org/pypi/postorius

You might also like to take a look at the new archiver project called
Hyperkitty:

    https://launchpad.net/hyperkitty

GNU Mailman, Postorius, and Hyperkitty are all distributed under the GNU
General Public License version 3 or later.

Detailed changes in Mailman 3.0b3 are available here:

    http://tinyurl.com/adgeuwg

Here's a summary of the most user and developer visible changes:

 * Python 2.7 is now required.  Python 2.6 is no longer officially
supported.

 * The canonical resource for a mailing list in the REST API now uses
its list-id by default instead of its posting address.  For backward
   compatibility, you can still reference a mailing list by its posting
   address.  However the list-id is more stable since it will not
change.

 * REST API change: The JSON representation for held messages has
changed to a more flat representation.

 * You can now specify a list style to use when creating a mailing list
   through the REST API.

 * The `subject_prefix` attribute of mailing lists can be get/set
through the REST API.  Thanks to Terri Oda.

 * Membership change moderation (subscriptions and unsubscription
requests) are available through the REST API.

 * `list_id` is added to the JSON representation for a mailing list.
Thanks to Jimmy Bergman.

 * User resources are expanded in the REST API.  You can change a user's
   display name or password, and you can now verify their password
through REST by posting the plain text password and checking the HTTP
response code.

 * Addresses can now be verified and unverified through the REST API.

 * Some changes have been made to the configuration file format.
   - [passlib]path is renamed to [passlib]configuration
   - [mta]configuration names a separate file to configure Postfix
   - The default style is now called `legacy-default`, and a
`legacy-announce` style has been added.  You can select the system
default style through via the [styles]default configuration.

 * More database schema cleanups, in both the ban table and the
mailinglist table.

 * Changes in the options for the `bin/mailman aliases` command.

 * Lots of other bug fixes.

Enjoy, and Happy New Year,
-Barry
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20121231/25b216d7/attachment.pgp>

From webmaster at gothamnetworking.com  Mon Dec 31 23:36:56 2012
From: webmaster at gothamnetworking.com (Gotham Webmaster)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2012 17:36:56 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Urgent help needed
Message-ID: <416F454A-9C9C-4BF9-9ECF-7A8EAA89A980@gothamnetworking.com>

I had a programmer install mailman on a new server and he said it was ready to the DNS switch. However, when that happened nothing worked. My sys admin said... 

"Looks like that list / alias is not setup or existing. ( unless is meant to be a mailbox and not a mailing list, but I don't think that's the case).
You / your mailman admin needs to set it up on the new server--mailman implementation-- before it starts accepting or delivering properly."

I need someone to assist me to get this going ASAP. Please contact me if you can help. I appreciate it.

Mitch Tobol
Gotham Webmaster
webmaster at gothamnetworking.com
516-382-1983