From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ralf Baechle Subject: Re: netdev munching messages again? Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2005 17:04:45 +0100 Message-ID: <20050608160444.GA17777@linux-mips.org> References: <20050607140842.778143000@axs> <20050607140901.632982000@axs> <20050607213621.GG20969@postel.suug.ch> <20050607.144237.93024273.davem@davemloft.net> <20050608132953.GK20969@postel.suug.ch> <1118238264.6382.43.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Thomas Graf , "David S. Miller" , netdev@oss.sgi.com Return-path: To: jamal Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1118238264.6382.43.camel@localhost.localdomain> Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 09:44:23AM -0400, jamal wrote: > I thought netdev just picks on me ;-> My stoopid ISP as well > as oss.sgi.com have some "clever" (read: questionable) ways > of delivering email which violates end to end semantics of SMTP. > I too noticed some emails were swallowed in the last 1-2 days. I know > from past experience in fact they will never be seen again;-> > Or someone, who doesnt look at the headers, will flame me for repeating > what has already been discussed and agreed on (has happened to me at > least 5 times on netdev ;->). > > It's quiet ironic when packets delivered over TCP dont make it to the > remote end, even when the app tries to help in reliable delivery;-> > > CCing El-sido Bacchus. Turns out that Thomas Graf's Email was intercepted by the spam filter, so I've tweaked the filter setup a bit - probably at the price of sacrificing some of the filter's effectivity. It unfortunately has become totally impractical to walk through the hundreds of moderator emails every day due to the volume, so I need to rely on people to report about such problem to postmaster@oss.sgi.com or me directly via email or irc. As for resending messages, due to people doing stupid things such as restoring their mail and news spools oss is keeping a non-expiring list of message IDs. However only non-spam message IDs are being recorded. Ralf