Message to Stan Hoeppner

Message to Stan Hoeppner

[Michael Monnerie]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 997 bytes --]

Dear Stan,

<stan@hardwarefreak.com>: host greer.hardwarefreak.com[65.41.216.221] 
said: 550    5.7.1 <mailsrv1.zmi.at[212.69.164.54]>: Client host 
rejected: We do not accept mail from .at domains (in reply to RCPT TO 
command)

I don't know what experiences you've had, but Austria is not that bad. 
We have Mozart, Walzer, the Danube, and Vienna is worlds most beautiful 
city to live in (search "vienna best city in the world" on Google finds 
http://www.citymayors.com/features/quality_survey.html and others).

Maybe you could rethink that policy? Spam rate is quite low with .at 
domains, compared to others.

-- 
mit freundlichen Grüssen,
Michael Monnerie, Ing. BSc

it-management Internet Services
http://proteger.at [gesprochen: Prot-e-schee]
Tel: 0660 / 415 65 31

****** Aktuelles Radiointerview! ******
http://www.it-podcast.at/aktuelle-sendung.html

// Wir haben im Moment zwei Häuser zu verkaufen:
// http://zmi.at/langegg/
// http://zmi.at/haus2009/

[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 121 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

Re: Message to Stan Hoeppner

[Michael Tokarev]

13.08.2010 15:00, Michael Monnerie пишет:
> Dear Stan,
> 
> <stan@hardwarefreak.com>: host greer.hardwarefreak.com[65.41.216.221] 
> said: 550    5.7.1 <mailsrv1.zmi.at[212.69.164.54]>: Client host 
> rejected: We do not accept mail from .at domains (in reply to RCPT TO 
> command)
> 
> I don't know what experiences you've had, but Austria is not that bad. 
> We have Mozart, Walzer, the Danube, and Vienna is worlds most beautiful 
> city to live in (search "vienna best city in the world" on Google finds 
> http://www.citymayors.com/features/quality_survey.html and others).

Heh.  I can say something similar about Russia as well (I
received similar reject to my email too, telling me about
.ru domains).  But I don't think it counts at all in this
context - it's a tradeoff, everyone decides for himself if
he wants to accept a small amount of email or block all
spam outright and deal with a few possible problem cases...

/mjt

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

Re: Message to Stan Hoeppner

[Michael Monnerie]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1001 bytes --]

On Freitag, 13. August 2010 Michael Tokarev wrote:
> Heh.  I can say something similar about Russia as well (I
> received similar reject to my email too, telling me about
> .ru domains).  But I don't think it counts at all in this
> context - it's a tradeoff, everyone decides for himself if
> he wants to accept a small amount of email or block all
> spam outright and deal with a few possible problem cases...
 
That explanation was more a joke than seriously meant, I apologize for 
the fuzz - it was a "not too hidden" ad for Austria and Vienna ;-)

Still, my pledge for removing .at blacklisting was meant seriously.

-- 
mit freundlichen Grüssen,
Michael Monnerie, Ing. BSc

it-management Internet Services
http://proteger.at [gesprochen: Prot-e-schee]
Tel: 0660 / 415 65 31

****** Aktuelles Radiointerview! ******
http://www.it-podcast.at/aktuelle-sendung.html

// Wir haben im Moment zwei Häuser zu verkaufen:
// http://zmi.at/langegg/
// http://zmi.at/haus2009/

[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 121 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

Re: Message to Stan Hoeppner

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 02:36:48PM +0200, Michael Monnerie wrote:
> On Freitag, 13. August 2010 Michael Tokarev wrote:
> > Heh.  I can say something similar about Russia as well (I
> > received similar reject to my email too, telling me about
> > .ru domains).  But I don't think it counts at all in this
> > context - it's a tradeoff, everyone decides for himself if
> > he wants to accept a small amount of email or block all
> > spam outright and deal with a few possible problem cases...
>  
> That explanation was more a joke than seriously meant, I apologize for 
> the fuzz - it was a "not too hidden" ad for Austria and Vienna ;-)

And out in the West it's even more beautiful..

/me runs and hides

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

Re: Message to Stan Hoeppner

[Stan Hoeppner]

Michael Monnerie put forth on 8/13/2010 6:00 AM:
> Dear Stan,
> 
> <stan@hardwarefreak.com>: host greer.hardwarefreak.com[65.41.216.221] 
> said: 550    5.7.1 <mailsrv1.zmi.at[212.69.164.54]>: Client host 
> rejected: We do not accept mail from .at domains (in reply to RCPT TO 
> command)
> 
> I don't know what experiences you've had, but Austria is not that bad. 
> We have Mozart, Walzer, the Danube, and Vienna is worlds most beautiful 
> city to live in (search "vienna best city in the world" on Google finds 
> http://www.citymayors.com/features/quality_survey.html and others).
> 
> Maybe you could rethink that policy? Spam rate is quite low with .at 
> domains, compared to others.

Fixed.  Sorry about that Michael.  I had an old pcre that checked the SMTP
client rDNS host name against a bunch of ccTLDs I received spam from some time
ago.  I forgot to disable it when I moved to a much more effective and a bit
more sane anti-spam configuration.  I'm surprised someone such as yourself
hadn't tripped this before now with all the lists I subscribe to.

That said, I do still block some entire countries' IP space using ipdeny.com
info, such as China, Russia, Korea, Malaysia, and a handful of others from
which I'll likely never receive legit mail.  I might from Russia due to some
of my list memberships.

The "Reply-to-list" option in one's MUA is one's friend.  Reply-all causes
rows like this and just duplicates messages needlessly.  There are times when
a reply-all is needed, but usually that's not the case.  Only when non-list
members are CC'd in a thread do I hit the "reply-all" button.

Anyway, enough about mail management and my somewhat draconian anti-spam
policies. ;)

-- 
Stan

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

Re: Message to Stan Hoeppner

[Martin Steigerwald]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 2251 bytes --]

Am Samstag 14 August 2010 schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
> Michael Monnerie put forth on 8/13/2010 6:00 AM:
> > Dear Stan,

Hi!

> > <stan@hardwarefreak.com>: host greer.hardwarefreak.com[65.41.216.221]
> > said: 550    5.7.1 <mailsrv1.zmi.at[212.69.164.54]>: Client host
> > rejected: We do not accept mail from .at domains (in reply to RCPT TO
> > command)
> > 
> > I don't know what experiences you've had, but Austria is not that
> > bad. We have Mozart, Walzer, the Danube, and Vienna is worlds most
> > beautiful city to live in (search "vienna best city in the world" on
> > Google finds http://www.citymayors.com/features/quality_survey.html
> > and others).
> > 
> > Maybe you could rethink that policy? Spam rate is quite low with .at
> > domains, compared to others.
> 
> Fixed.  Sorry about that Michael.  I had an old pcre that checked the
> SMTP client rDNS host name against a bunch of ccTLDs I received spam
> from some time ago.  I forgot to disable it when I moved to a much
> more effective and a bit more sane anti-spam configuration.  I'm
> surprised someone such as yourself hadn't tripped this before now with
> all the lists I subscribe to.
> 
> That said, I do still block some entire countries' IP space using
> ipdeny.com info, such as China, Russia, Korea, Malaysia, and a handful
> of others from which I'll likely never receive legit mail.  I might
> from Russia due to some of my list memberships.

Hmmm, I use policyd-weight to weight several blacklists instead of 
blocking complete country IP spaces unconditionally and together with some 
local spam filtering with CRM114 at home it keeps spam gets through rate 
very comfortable low for more than a year already. I estimate I do not 
have more than 20 spam mails marked as unsure in a whole week.The rate is 
a bit higher at work, but still quite comfortable, where Zimbra does the 
additional spam filtering I think with a learnable Spamassassin setup. But 
most mail is blocked by policyd-weight at SMTP level anyway.

So I do not see any need to block complete IP spaces, but your mileage may 
vary. 

Ciao,
-- 
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA  B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7

[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 121 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

Re: Message to Stan - again

[Michael Monnerie]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 724 bytes --]

Sorry to bother all again, I just wanted to inform Stan that his filter 
still has a problem:

<stan@hardwarefreak.com>: host greer.hardwarefreak.com[65.41.216.221] 
said: 554  5.7.1 <mailsrv1.zmi.at[212.69.164.54]>: Client host rejected: 
Access denied (in reply to RCPT TO command)

Your .at filter seems removed, but another one still hits (me).

-- 
mit freundlichen Grüssen,
Michael Monnerie, Ing. BSc

it-management Internet Services
http://proteger.at [gesprochen: Prot-e-schee]
Tel: 0660 / 415 65 31

****** Aktuelles Radiointerview! ******
http://www.it-podcast.at/aktuelle-sendung.html

// Wir haben im Moment zwei Häuser zu verkaufen:
// http://zmi.at/langegg/
// http://zmi.at/haus2009/

[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 121 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

[META-LIST] Now: perennial "reply-to-all" -- Was: Message to Stan - again

[Stan Hoeppner]

Michael Monnerie put forth on 8/15/2010 1:52 PM:
> Sorry to bother all again, I just wanted to inform Stan that his filter 
> still has a problem:
> 
> <stan@hardwarefreak.com>: host greer.hardwarefreak.com[65.41.216.221] 
> said: 554  5.7.1 <mailsrv1.zmi.at[212.69.164.54]>: Client host rejected: 
> Access denied (in reply to RCPT TO command)
> 
> Your .at filter seems removed, but another one still hits (me).

Apparently you're just in the wrong part of the world Michael. :)  Ok, it
should be "fixed" now.  BTW...


Why does "everyone" on this list "reply-to-all" when 99% of the time it is
totally unnecessary, redundant, and potentially ruffles a sender's feathers,
as in this case?  TTBOMK in recent months the only time I saw that
"reply-to-all" was necessary was a thread which included the linux-kernel list
or someone who wasn't a member of the xfs list.  I love you guys and all, and
I love XFS, but do I really need _two_ message copies each time someone
replies to a thread in which I participated?  :)  Do I need to be called out
in public for a "problem" with my spam filter when one of those two
_redundant_ messages gets blocked, even though the other made it through, and
always will?  :)

I'm on 7 FOSS technical mailing lists, the others being debian-user, dovecot,
linux-ide, postfix-users, roundcube, and samba.  Of these 7, only xfs and
linux-ide routinely suffer the "reply-to-all" syndrome.  And of the others, on
some, the list OPs will actively scold people when they catch them performing
this perennial "reply-to-all" act.  Wietse Venema (father of Postfix) in
particular gets perturbed by the "reply-to-all" behavior.  Not surprising I
guess, with him living and breathing SMTP mail for the past ~15 years.

Most MUA's have a built in "reply-to-list" function these days and if not
someone usually offers a plug-in.  I use it in TBird, first as a plug-in, and
now that the function is fully integrated.  It works great.  Never a problem.

I'm not trying to be a PITA for anyone here.  I'm just trying to understand
the apparent _need_ to always "reply-to-all" given that it's unnecessary 99%
of the time and simply causes problems, some small, others more severe.

P.S.  When someone feels slighted by the spam filter of a colleague, the first
thing you should do before making a public statement about it is to find a
local spammer and physically assault him for an hour or so.  Then type your
email.  If it weren't for the 10s of thousands of folks around the world like
the one you just pummeled, my draconian spam filter wouldn't exist.  :)
Rightly place blame where it _belongs_.

-- 
Stan


_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

Re: [META-LIST] Now: perennial "reply-to-all"

[Michael Monnerie]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 756 bytes --]

On Montag, 16. August 2010 Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Why does "everyone" on this list "reply-to-all" when 99% of the time
>  it is totally unnecessary, redundant, and potentially ruffles a
>  sender's feathers, as in this case?
 
I'm also on several lists, but the only list where reply-to-all is used 
is this one - so I followed the way it's done here without having 
questioned why.

-- 
mit freundlichen Grüssen,
Michael Monnerie, Ing. BSc

it-management Internet Services
http://proteger.at [gesprochen: Prot-e-schee]
Tel: 0660 / 415 65 31

****** Aktuelles Radiointerview! ******
http://www.it-podcast.at/aktuelle-sendung.html

// Wir haben im Moment zwei Häuser zu verkaufen:
// http://zmi.at/langegg/
// http://zmi.at/haus2009/

[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 121 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

Re: [META-LIST] Now: perennial "reply-to-all"

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 07:32:02AM +0200, Michael Monnerie wrote:
> On Montag, 16. August 2010 Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> > Why does "everyone" on this list "reply-to-all" when 99% of the time
> >  it is totally unnecessary, redundant, and potentially ruffles a
> >  sender's feathers, as in this case?
>  
> I'm also on several lists, but the only list where reply-to-all is used 
> is this one - so I followed the way it's done here without having 
> questioned why.

It's done by all Lists in the Linux development universe, and it's the
only sane way to handle a list.  We don't require people to subsribe to
post to the list, and keeping everyone in the To/Cc list means it
arrives at those people as well.  In addition it allows subscribes that
are on tons of lists to prioritize discussions they're actually involved
in personally by getting a copy in the inbox that can be replied to ASAP
while also having an archived copy in the list folder.  Every other way
to run a list is simply insane.

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

Re: [META-LIST] Now: perennial "reply-to-all"

[Stan Hoeppner]

Christoph Hellwig put forth on 8/17/2010 4:01 AM:
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 07:32:02AM +0200, Michael Monnerie wrote:
>> On Montag, 16. August 2010 Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>>> Why does "everyone" on this list "reply-to-all" when 99% of the time
>>>  it is totally unnecessary, redundant, and potentially ruffles a
>>>  sender's feathers, as in this case?
>>  
>> I'm also on several lists, but the only list where reply-to-all is used 
>> is this one - so I followed the way it's done here without having 
>> questioned why.
> 
> It's done by all Lists in the Linux development universe, and it's the
> only sane way to handle a list.  We don't require people to subsribe to
> post to the list, and keeping everyone in the To/Cc list means it
> arrives at those people as well.  In addition it allows subscribes that
> are on tons of lists to prioritize discussions they're actually involved
> in personally by getting a copy in the inbox that can be replied to ASAP
> while also having an archived copy in the list folder.  Every other way
> to run a list is simply insane.

Thanks Christoph.  That makes sense.

-- 
Stan

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs