Hello, A gentle reminder to those of you who use autoresponders when you go on vacation - are out of the office - go to the men's/ladies room etc. DON'T subscribe to NANOG and other lists from these accounts. Having just been bombarded by a bunch of "I'm out of the office on Vacation until January 5th - In case of emergency..." type messages after my prior message, I can tell you it's irritating as hell, and pretty rude. /rlj
On Tue, 22 Dec 1998, Rodney Joffe wrote: ) A gentle reminder to those of you who use autoresponders when you go on ) vacation - are out of the office - go to the men's/ladies room etc. ) ) DON'T subscribe to NANOG and other lists from these accounts. ) ) Having just been bombarded by a bunch of "I'm out of the office on ) Vacation until January 5th - In case of emergency..." type messages ) after my prior message, I can tell you it's irritating as hell, and ) pretty rude. Actually, this mailing list neither adds in a "Mailing-List: ..." header nor a "Precedence: bulk" header, which are the two easiest ways to spot a modern mailing list. I'd suggest you complain to the mailing list managers, not the poor people whose [most likely] properly configured autoresponders aren't being given the information they should be given. -- Daniel Reed <n@ml.org> Many a false step is made by standing still...
Actually, this mailing list neither adds in a "Mailing-List: ..." header nor a "Precedence: bulk" header, which are the two easiest ways to spot a modern mailing list. I'd suggest you complain to the mailing list managers, not the poor people whose [most likely] properly configured autoresponders aren't being given the information they should be given.
Actually, the way to spot *any* mailing list is to notice that your email address is not listed in the To: or Cc: lines. These peoples' autoresponders are broken; the list is fine. --asp@partan.com (Andrew Partan)
At 11:15 PM 12/22/98 -0500, Andrew Partan wrote:
Actually, this mailing list neither adds in a "Mailing-List: ..." header nor a "Precedence: bulk" header, which are the two easiest ways to spot a modern mailing list. I'd suggest you complain to the mailing list managers, not the poor people whose [most likely] properly configured autoresponders aren't being given the information they should be given.
Actually, the way to spot *any* mailing list is to notice that your email address is not listed in the To: or Cc: lines.
These peoples' autoresponders are broken; the list is fine.
No, the list is not fine. It should set the Precendence level. Your method would automatically assume that anyone who BCC'ed you was a mailing list.
No, the list is not fine. It should set the Precendence level. Your method would automatically assume that anyone who BCC'ed you was a mailing list.
That's OK - I don't want to send vacation mail to folks that BBC me either. Useful rules (taken from 'man vacation'): No message will be sent unless login (or an alias supplied using the -a option) is part of either the ``To:'' or ``Cc:'' headers of the mail. No messages from ``???-REQUEST'', ``Postmaster'', ``UUCP'', ``MAILER'', or ``MAILER-DAEMON'' will be replied to (where these strings are case insensitive) nor is a notification sent if a ``Precedence: bulk'' or ``Precedence: junk'' line is included in the mail headers. Anyhow, enough non-operation junk for now. --asp@partan.com (Andrew Partan)
If you use procmail to filter things, follow the instructions here: http://www.inch.com/info/tech/HOWTOS/vacation.html and make sure the line you add is the very last rule. This will avoid any possibility of bounces to lists. I'm on /usr/bin/vacation now, and it's kept me from bouncing... Just thought I'd add this nugget, as lots of places use procmail as the delivery agent, and it can be a pain to set up in your .procmailrc if you're not familiar with the syntax. Charles -- =-----------------= = | Charles Sprickman Internet Channel | | INCH System Administration Team (212)243-5200 | | spork@inch.com access@inch.com | = =----------------= On Wed, 23 Dec 1998, Andrew Partan wrote:
No, the list is not fine. It should set the Precendence level. Your method would automatically assume that anyone who BCC'ed you was a mailing list.
That's OK - I don't want to send vacation mail to folks that BBC me either.
Useful rules (taken from 'man vacation'): No message will be sent unless login (or an alias supplied using the -a option) is part of either the ``To:'' or ``Cc:'' headers of the mail. No messages from ``???-REQUEST'', ``Postmaster'', ``UUCP'', ``MAILER'', or ``MAILER-DAEMON'' will be replied to (where these strings are case insensitive) nor is a notification sent if a ``Precedence: bulk'' or ``Precedence: junk'' line is included in the mail headers.
Anyhow, enough non-operation junk for now. --asp@partan.com (Andrew Partan)
On Tue, Dec 22, 1998 at 09:45:57PM -0800, Derek Balling wrote:
No, the list is not fine. It should set the Precendence level. Your method would automatically assume that anyone who BCC'ed you was a mailing list.
It appears to be adding it now. Go hide under your christmas trees or around your other holiday related items and enjoy the holidays. - jared -- Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared@puck.nether.net clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.
On Tue, 22 Dec 1998, Daniel Reed wrote:
Actually, this mailing list neither adds in a "Mailing-List: ..." header nor a "Precedence: bulk" header, which are the two easiest ways to spot a modern mailing list. I'd suggest you complain to the mailing list managers, not the poor people whose [most likely] properly configured autoresponders aren't being given the information they should be given.
Also, it seems to use sendmail for its deliveries. This makes it take 10-20 minutes before email reaches me (sometimes more). I wish they would use qmail instead (for instance). Dont know if they use majordomo but I have successfully made majordomo use qmail-inject and use qmail for outgoing list-mail whilst still using sendmail for incoming email (for flexibility with aliases etc. Makes the transition much easier. ----- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
At 10:55 +0100 23 December 1998, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike> wrote:
On Tue, 22 Dec 1998, Daniel Reed wrote:
Actually, this mailing list neither adds in a "Mailing-List: ..." header nor a "Precedence: bulk" header, which are the two easiest ways to spot a modern mailing list. I'd suggest you complain to the mailing list managers, not the poor people whose [most likely] properly configured autoresponders aren't being given the information they should be given.
Also, it seems to use sendmail for its deliveries. This makes it take 10-20 minutes before email reaches me (sometimes more). I wish they would use qmail instead (for instance). Dont know if they use majordomo but I have successfully made majordomo use qmail-inject and use qmail for outgoing list-mail whilst still using sendmail for incoming email (for flexibility with aliases etc. Makes the transition much easier.
The NANOG list has been running with sendmail, majordomo and bulk_mailer on a long-suffering SPARC 5. This is the reason for both the lag time and the lack of Precedence: header (bulk_mailer strips it out by default; I don't know if running it thus was a policy decision or simply an oversight). On and off for the last few days I've been using you all as guinea pigs in my evaluation of Postfix on an Ultra 5, and so far it looks promising. Delivery times are down quite a bit. To use you as an example, Mikael, the current setup took between 9 and 14 minutes to make deliveries to you yesterday. Routing the list traffic through Postfix on the faster machine dropped that to 60-100 seconds. And as several people have noted, the Precedence: header is preserved. It's a little early yet to make a wholesale switch to the new system, but I'm hoping to do so in January. If nothing else we'll be on the better hardware. Bear with us a little longer. -- John Hensley <hensley@merit.edu> Merit Network, Inc.
On Tue, 22 Dec 1998, Daniel Reed wrote:
Actually, this mailing list neither adds in a "Mailing-List: ..." header nor a "Precedence: bulk" header, which are the two easiest ways to spot a modern mailing list. I'd suggest you complain to the mailing list managers, not the poor people whose [most likely] properly configured autoresponders aren't being given the information they should be given.
from the headers...<may be a new addition> Sender: owner-nanog@merit.edu Precedence: bulk /rf
Actually, this mailing list neither adds in a "Mailing-List: ..." header nor a "Precedence: bulk" header, which are the two easiest ways to spot a modern mailing list.
i missed the rfc on this. ref please. barring that, i just forward the garbage to the list admin and the sub is deleted. bleedin' idiots. randy
participants (10)
-
Andrew Partan -
Charles Sprickman -
Daniel Reed -
Derek Balling -
Jared Mauch -
John Hensley -
Mikael Abrahamsson -
Randy Bush -
Rich Fulton -
Rodney Joffe