Re: [Mailman-Users] another question about invitation confirmationsubject line/VERP

Christopher Adams wrote: > >So, if all I want to do (which was my original question) is to VERP >confirmations, I only have to add this to Postfix: > >default_verp_delimiters = += >verp_delimiter_filter = -+=x Actually, you don't need either of these. default_verp_delimiters specifies the defaul

Re: [Mailman-Users] another question about invitation confirmationsubject line/VERP

On 11/29/07, Christopher Adams wrote: > Thanks to all for the plethora of information about VERP and how it is > used by the MTAs and Mailman. Just for clarification, I don't have a > list of 250,000 subscribers, just a site that has a total of 250,000 > subscribers over 500+ lists. I think th

Re: [Mailman-Users] another question about invitation confirmationsubject line/VERP

Thanks to all for the plethora of information about VERP and how it is used by the MTAs and Mailman. Just for clarification, I don't have a list of 250,000 subscribers, just a site that has a total of 250,000 subscribers over 500+ lists. I think the largest is about 40,000. So, if all I want to do

Re: [Mailman-Users] another question about invitation confirmationsubject line/VERP

On 11/27/07, Mark Sapiro wrote: > As a point of reference however, there are lots of lists on python.org > and some are quite busy (e.g. [EMAIL PROTECTED]) and they are > personalized and it seems to work OK. Brad has posted on this in the > past >

Re: [Mailman-Users] another question about invitation confirmation subject line/VERP

On 11/27/07, Christopher Adams wrote: > One concern - Charles mentioned how 'expensive' it was to use VERP > with Postfix. I am wondering what kind of hit on the responsiveness of > my Mailman server will be. There has been some research on this topic, which is summarized at

Re: [Mailman-Users] another question about invitation confirmationsubject line/VERP

Christopher Adams wrote: > >One concern - Charles mentioned how 'expensive' it was to use VERP >with Postfix. I am wondering what kind of hit on the responsiveness of >my Mailman server will be. I have over 500 lists and 250,000 >subscribers. If VERP being used for Mailman causes more mail activity

Re: [Mailman-Users] another question about invitation confirmation subject line/VERP

Geez, now I don't know who to listen to. :>). Anyway, my assumption was wrong and I based it on the invitation confirmation not completely working. Now it does and I thank you both. One concern - Charles mentioned how 'expensive' it was to use VERP with Postfix. I am wondering what kind of hit on

Re: [Mailman-Users] another question about invitation confirmation subject line/VERP

On 11/27/07, Mark Sapiro wrote: > Quoting from , aka 'man 5 > postconf' > > recipient_delimiter (default: empty) That man page may or may not describe the current state of affairs, and of course even if it does then you might be dealing with an older

Re: [Mailman-Users] another question about invitation confirmation subject line/VERP

On 11/27/2007, Mark Sapiro ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: >> On 11/27/2007, Mark Sapiro ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: >>> Yes, one would think that, but you do need to set >>> >>> recipient_delimiter = + >>> >>> in main.cf, even though the Postfix document doesn't get to >>> that until much later. >>

Re: [Mailman-Users] another question aboutinvitationconfirmationsubject line/VERP

Charles Marcus wrote: >On 11/27/2007, Mark Sapiro ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: >> Yes, one would think that, but you do need to set >> >> recipient_delimiter = + >> >> in main.cf, even though the Postfix document doesn't get to that until >> much later. > >No, you don't - this is the default... yo

Re: [Mailman-Users] another question about invitationconfirmationsubject line/VERP

On 11/27/2007, Mark Sapiro ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Yes, one would think that, but you do need to set > > recipient_delimiter = + > > in main.cf, even though the Postfix document doesn't get to that until > much later. No, you don't - this is the default... you only need to explicitly set i

Re: [Mailman-Users] another question about invitationconfirmationsubject line/VERP

Christopher Adams wrote: >Thank you for clarifying that. I assumed from the Postfix/VERP >configuration documentation (below) that the '+' delimiter would be >used regardless of entering it in the Postfix main.cf file. I should >tried adding it anyway, but I hadn't gotten to that step yet. Thanks

Re: [Mailman-Users] another question about invitation confirmationsubject line/VERP

Thank you for clarifying that. I assumed from the Postfix/VERP configuration documentation (below) that the '+' delimiter would be used regardless of entering it in the Postfix main.cf file. I should tried adding it anyway, but I hadn't gotten to that step yet. Thanks, it works as it should. Quot

Re: [Mailman-Users] another question about invitation confirmationsubject line/VERP

Christopher Adams wrote: > >One question- Since the subject line is changed and replaces the >confirmation ID code with other text, does that mean that simple >replying to the message to confirmm will no work? It will still work if your incoming MTA recognizes addresses of the form [EMAIL PRO

[Mailman-Users] another question about invitation confirmation subject line/VERP

I have read the FAQ about modifying the mm_cfg.py file to create a more "user friendly" subject for confirmations. I implemented this with my Mailman/Postfix setup. I mainly wanted it for Invitation confirmations, but I understand that for newer versions of Mailman, it works for other confirmations

Re: [Mailman-Users] Another question.. hopefully more interesting :)

Richard Barrett said: > Must have missed that the first time around or at least failed to grasp > why it was of concern. If I am honest fail to see why you have a > problem with all the virtual hosts using the same scheme but what the > heck, its your system. Easy--because SSL isn't very friendly

Re: [Mailman-Users] Another question.. hopefully more interesting :)

On Saturday, July 26, 2003, at 06:30 PM, Glenn Sieb wrote: My question was: Virtual Hosts. I have a primary host (wingfoot), and others (domain2.org, etc). I apologize, but I thought I had been pretty clear in that my whole question was that I wish Wingfoot's Mailman to be behind SSL and the o

Re: [Mailman-Users] Another question.. hopefully more interesting :)

Heya Richard :) Richard Barrett said: > Before commenting on the detail of what you do I make the observation > that using Secure HTTP and private mail archives are not the same topic. This is correct, and a nice summary of SSL versus private archives, but it has nothing to do with my question, u

Re: [Mailman-Users] Another question.. hopefully more interesting :)

On Saturday, July 26, 2003, at 01:45 AM, Glenn Sieb wrote: Hi everyone... I currently run Mailman (2.1) (which I love.. great job, guys!), and use it to run a few private lists behind SSL. I have recently been asked to do some virtual domain hosting for some friends, and would like to provide t

[Mailman-Users] Another question.. hopefully more interesting :)

Hi everyone... I currently run Mailman (2.1) (which I love.. great job, guys!), and use it to run a few private lists behind SSL. I have recently been asked to do some virtual domain hosting for some friends, and would like to provide them with their own Mailman lists, should they wish. In mm_cfg

Re: [Mailman-Users] another question....

Alex Sammons wrote: >In fact both users exist, i don´t know why send > this message? Is 'mail.com' a fabricated domain that you put in your message, or are you actually trying to send mail to the domain, mail.com (aka Net2Phone, Inc.) ? If it was fabricated just for the purpose

[Mailman-Users] another question....

Hi there!!! what about when a receive a message of The original message was received at Mon, 28 Jan 2002 10:23:13 -0600 (CST) from nobody@localhost - The following addresses had permanent fatal errors - [EMAIL PROTECTED] (reason: 550 5.1.1 User unknown) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (

Re: [Mailman-Users] another question

You really need to read the instructions. > Hey, thanks for the help. I can get to everything through apache now. But > the links that it uses does not make sense. For example: > http://readinks.info/mailman/listinfo/test ... listinfo is a file not a > folder. I know I have access to it because i

Re: [Mailman-Users] another question

Steven Schermerhorn wrote: > Hey, thanks for the help. I can get to everything through apache now. But > the links that it uses does not make sense. For example: > http://readinks.info/mailman/listinfo/test ... listinfo is a file not a > folder. I know I have access to it because if it just do li

[Mailman-Users] another question

Hey, thanks for the help. I can get to everything through apache now. But the links that it uses does not make sense. For example: http://readinks.info/mailman/listinfo/test ... listinfo is a file not a folder. I know I have access to it because if it just do listinfo then it downloads the file.