Re: [Mailman-Users] "Bounce action notification" emails for subscribes/unsubscribes

2017-10-24 Thread Mark Sapiro
On 10/24/2017 06:06 AM, Jim Popovitch wrote: > > I'm jumping in late here.. Is the problem possibly DMARC alignment > failures? If so, I've been working on a patch for this: No. This has nothing to do with DMARC. However your branch might be relevant. The issue is that owner notifications from

Re: [Mailman-Users] "Bounce action notification" emails for subscribes/unsubscribes

2017-10-24 Thread Mark Sapiro
On 10/23/2017 10:21 PM, Terry . wrote: > > cPanel responded with the following 2 emails: > > > Response #1: > > > > Hello, > > Unfortunately though, as I mentioned previously this is a result of an > upstream design choice from Mailman not from cPanel, we

Re: [Mailman-Users] "Bounce action notification" emails for subscribes/unsubscribes

2017-10-24 Thread Jim Popovitch
On Oct 24, 2017 04:20, "Stephen J. Turnbull" wrote: (Making it a list is a natural choice, and I don't see how that causes additional difficulties for cPanel.) I'm jumping in late here.. Is the problem possibly DMARC alignment failures? If so, I've been working on a patch for this: https://co

[Mailman-Users] "Bounce action notification" emails for subscribes/unsubscribes

2017-10-24 Thread Stephen J. Turnbull
Terry . writes: > Any comments on any of this, Mark or anyone else, especially re > this claim: "...this is a result of an upstream design choice from > Mailman not from cPanel, As I understand it, the "design choice" meant is to have a sitewide address "mail...@site.tld". This isn't so much

Re: [Mailman-Users] A rant on parsing RFCs

2017-10-24 Thread Stephen J. Turnbull
Ruben Safir writes: > RFCs are a record of a process. Partially true. The process almost invariably leaves its trace in the text, and (as in any committee work) many compromises are inexplicable without reference to the process. But the text of an RFC is a specification, not a narrative. > U