trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net

Message: previous - next
Month: November 2014

Re: [trinity-users] Email server maintenance

From: Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@...>
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2014 16:25:56 +0000
On Friday 21 November 2014 16:19:21 Timothy Pearson wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA224
>
> > Hi Timothy!
> >
> > 2014-11-06 17:43 GMT+02:00 Timothy Pearson <kb9vqf@...>:
> >> During this window I will (in addition to many other changes) be
> >> addressing the sporadic list delivery issues to specific addresses
> >> relating to DKIM implementation on certain service providers.  It is
> >> hoped
> >> that these upgrades will stabilize the lists somewhat and make them
> >> easier
> >> to use.
> >
> > Was your maintenance work in the beginning of November related to
> > sporadic "bouncing message" issue?
>
> Probably not--that has been ongoing for some time.  The maintinance laid
> the groundwork for me to attempt to deal with the problem via DKIM, but
> that has not been activated at this time.
>
> > Sometimes messages from the list can't be delivered to my gmail
> > account, and I think it doesn't have to do with my account
> > specifically. Anyway, see the "bouncing warning" as an example below.
> > I receiving such warnings quite often. If it's a problem on the
> > mailing list side, then I could provide more information, not hesitate
> > to ask.
>
> The critical portion of the message is this header:
> "Unauthenticated email from yahoo.com is not accepted"
>
> As to why Google thinks "pearsoncomputing.net" == "yahoo.com" I have no
> idea, but it seems that we are not alone in dealing with this issue:
> http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2014/08/31/1
> http://onyx-pc.com/content/ezmlm-warning
> http://osdir.com/ml/opensource-software-security/2014-08/msg00198.html
> http://squid-web-proxy-cache.1019090.n4.nabble.com/problem-with-squid-users
>-maillist-td4667315.html etc.
>
> That last message at least outlines the problem.  Trouble is we are one of
> the sites struggling with inertia; we couldn't implement DKIM until the
> recent upgrades, and after the upgrades I have been too busy with R14
> release to roll out DKIM, etc.  Boils down to the typical human condition
> I suppose: too much to do, too little time and money. :-)

It doesn't seem to hurt any of us.  R14 was clearly much more important!

Lisi