[mmckinlay@gnu.org: [postmaster@sourceware] failure notice (fwd)]

[mmckinlay@gnu.org: [postmaster@sourceware] failure notice (fwd)]

[Chris Faylor]

I guess I shouldn't try to defend policy every time I get one of these,
right?

I actually didn't know we were using DUL.

cgf

----- Forwarded message from Mo McKinlay <mmckinlay@gnu.org> -----

From: Mo McKinlay <mmckinlay@gnu.org>
To: postmaster@sourceware.cygnus.com
Subject: [postmaster@sourceware] failure notice (fwd)
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000 23:40:31 +0100 (GMT)


Excuse me?

I run my own MTA because I don't trust my ISP's. Because I'm on a dynamic
IP, it's impossible to route mail via another server without it being
opened to relaying for everybody else on my ISP, and I'm not willing to do
that to my static IP'd servers.

As DUL is nothing more than a list of dialup-based dynamic IPs, which
isn't going to be a whole lot use to you, I strongly urge you to stop
using this service.

Regards,

-- 
Mo McKinlay             Chief Software Architect         inter/open Labs
mmckinlay (at) gnu.org                                http://www.gnu.org


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: 13 Jul 2000 22:25:03 -0000
From: MAILER-DAEMON@sourceware.cygnus.com
To: mmckinlay@gnu.org
Subject: failure notice

Hi. This is the qmail-send program at sourceware.cygnus.com.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.

<gcc@gcc.gnu.org>:
 
  In an effort to cut down on our spam intake we block email from
  certain lists and unfortunately you have just discovered the hard
  way that sometimes non-spam mail gets caught accidentally.
  In most cases you can clear this up by an upgrade to your mail
  server or sometimes by getting an erroneous listing removed.
  For more information about our use of these lists, see
        http://gcc.gnu.org/lists.html
 
  The IP number that I'm denying mail from is 212.188.142.208
  The list that you're on is MAPS DUL.  See:
      http://maps.vix.com/dul/
  for more information about this list and why you are on it.
 

--- Below this line is a copy of the message.

Return-Path: <mmckinlay@gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 11989 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2000 22:24:57 -0000
Received: from dyn208-ras47.screaming.net (HELO sphere.stock.ekto.org) (212.188.142.208)
  by sourceware.cygnus.com with SMTP; 13 Jul 2000 22:24:57 -0000
Received: from sphere.stock.ekto.org (mmckinlay@sphere.stock.ekto.org [192.168.1.3])
	by sphere.stock.ekto.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA07722;
	Thu, 13 Jul 2000 23:24:37 +0100
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000 23:24:37 +0100 (GMT)
From: Mo McKinlay <mmckinlay@gnu.org>
X-Sender: mmckinlay@sphere.stock.ekto.org
To: Alex Samuel <samuel@codesourcery.com>
cc: Nick Clifton <nickc@cygnus.com>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: What is the purpose of this patch ?
In-Reply-To: <14702.16047.992059.877697@coriander.indetermi.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0007132323510.7719-100000@sphere.stock.ekto.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII


# which should be sufficient.  However, that leaves NULL undefined on
# some systems.  I don't know enough about header files on the various
# and sundry systems out there to know what the right answer is.
# My feeling is that stdio.h shouldn't get included if the code does no
# I/O, so I hope someone on the gcc list can suggest the right solution.

I don't know if this is any help, but I use <stddef.h> to obtain a
definition for NULL if I'm not performing I/O (and feel hence that
<stdio.h> is unncessary).

HTH

-- 
Mo McKinlay             Chief Software Architect         inter/open Labs
mmckinlay (at) gnu.org                                http://www.gnu.org


----- End forwarded message -----

[mmckinlay@gnu.org: [postmaster@sourceware] failure notice (fwd)]

[Chris Faylor]

I guess I shouldn't try to defend policy every time I get one of these,
right?

I actually didn't know we were using DUL.

cgf

----- Forwarded message from Mo McKinlay <mmckinlay@gnu.org> -----

From: Mo McKinlay <mmckinlay@gnu.org>
To: postmaster@sourceware.cygnus.com
Subject: [postmaster@sourceware] failure notice (fwd)
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000 23:40:31 +0100 (GMT)


Excuse me?

I run my own MTA because I don't trust my ISP's. Because I'm on a dynamic
IP, it's impossible to route mail via another server without it being
opened to relaying for everybody else on my ISP, and I'm not willing to do
that to my static IP'd servers.

As DUL is nothing more than a list of dialup-based dynamic IPs, which
isn't going to be a whole lot use to you, I strongly urge you to stop
using this service.

Regards,

-- 
Mo McKinlay             Chief Software Architect         inter/open Labs
mmckinlay (at) gnu.org                                http://www.gnu.org


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: 13 Jul 2000 22:25:03 -0000
From: MAILER-DAEMON@sourceware.cygnus.com
To: mmckinlay@gnu.org
Subject: failure notice

Hi. This is the qmail-send program at sourceware.cygnus.com.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.

<gcc@gcc.gnu.org>:
 
  In an effort to cut down on our spam intake we block email from
  certain lists and unfortunately you have just discovered the hard
  way that sometimes non-spam mail gets caught accidentally.
  In most cases you can clear this up by an upgrade to your mail
  server or sometimes by getting an erroneous listing removed.
  For more information about our use of these lists, see
        http://gcc.gnu.org/lists.html
 
  The IP number that I'm denying mail from is 212.188.142.208
  The list that you're on is MAPS DUL.  See:
      http://maps.vix.com/dul/
  for more information about this list and why you are on it.
 

--- Below this line is a copy of the message.

Return-Path: <mmckinlay@gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 11989 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2000 22:24:57 -0000
Received: from dyn208-ras47.screaming.net (HELO sphere.stock.ekto.org) (212.188.142.208)
  by sourceware.cygnus.com with SMTP; 13 Jul 2000 22:24:57 -0000
Received: from sphere.stock.ekto.org (mmckinlay@sphere.stock.ekto.org [192.168.1.3])
	by sphere.stock.ekto.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA07722;
	Thu, 13 Jul 2000 23:24:37 +0100
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000 23:24:37 +0100 (GMT)
From: Mo McKinlay <mmckinlay@gnu.org>
X-Sender: mmckinlay@sphere.stock.ekto.org
To: Alex Samuel <samuel@codesourcery.com>
cc: Nick Clifton <nickc@cygnus.com>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: What is the purpose of this patch ?
In-Reply-To: <14702.16047.992059.877697@coriander.indetermi.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0007132323510.7719-100000@sphere.stock.ekto.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII


# which should be sufficient.  However, that leaves NULL undefined on
# some systems.  I don't know enough about header files on the various
# and sundry systems out there to know what the right answer is.
# My feeling is that stdio.h shouldn't get included if the code does no
# I/O, so I hope someone on the gcc list can suggest the right solution.

I don't know if this is any help, but I use <stddef.h> to obtain a
definition for NULL if I'm not performing I/O (and feel hence that
<stdio.h> is unncessary).

HTH

-- 
Mo McKinlay             Chief Software Architect         inter/open Labs
mmckinlay (at) gnu.org                                http://www.gnu.org


----- End forwarded message -----

Re: [mmckinlay@gnu.org: [postmaster@sourceware] failure notice (fwd)]

[Jason Molenda]

On Thu, Jul 13, 2000 at 06:55:54PM -0400, Chris Faylor wrote:
> I guess I shouldn't try to defend policy every time I get one of these,
> right?
> 
> I actually didn't know we were using DUL.

It stops a lot of spam.  Look over /var/log/rbl-<something>.
It is rarely controversial.

If you feel compelled to follow up, point him to the
	http://mail-abuse.org/dul/intro.htm

and say "We agree with this".  I was going to write a big long
paragraph, but it's all there already so I won't.

J

Re: [mmckinlay@gnu.org: [postmaster@sourceware] failure notice (fwd)]

[Jason Molenda]

On Thu, Jul 13, 2000 at 06:55:54PM -0400, Chris Faylor wrote:
> I guess I shouldn't try to defend policy every time I get one of these,
> right?
> 
> I actually didn't know we were using DUL.

It stops a lot of spam.  Look over /var/log/rbl-<something>.
It is rarely controversial.

If you feel compelled to follow up, point him to the
	http://mail-abuse.org/dul/intro.htm

and say "We agree with this".  I was going to write a big long
paragraph, but it's all there already so I won't.

J

Re: [mmckinlay@gnu.org: [postmaster@sourceware] failure notice (fwd)]

[Jeffrey A Law]

  In message < 20000713185554.J7997@cygnus.com >you write:
  > I guess I shouldn't try to defend policy every time I get one of these,
  > right?
  > 
  > I actually didn't know we were using DUL.
We should just create a FAQ entry and point folks at it.
jeff

Re: [mmckinlay@gnu.org: [postmaster@sourceware] failure notice (fwd)]

[Jeffrey A Law]

  In message < 20000713185554.J7997@cygnus.com >you write:
  > I guess I shouldn't try to defend policy every time I get one of these,
  > right?
  > 
  > I actually didn't know we were using DUL.
We should just create a FAQ entry and point folks at it.
jeff

Re: [mmckinlay@gnu.org: [postmaster@sourceware] failure notice (fwd)]

[Jim Kingdon]

> We should just create a FAQ entry and point folks at it.

Not sure what you had in mind, but our DUL use is covered at
http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html (item #7).  Suggested changes to
that page are welcome but I doubt we should try to duplicate all the
detailed ins and outs which people can read about on the DUL, RBL, &c
sites.

In this specific case, I'd suggest to the guy that he run smtpauth on
his static IP'd server.  But if he comes up with some reason that
won't work, well, yeah, it is a "stopping spam is more important to us
than X" thing.  Just be polite.  And yes, you can ignore him if you
want to, but in my experience I was usually able to send people away
feeling that they understood our position.

Re: [mmckinlay@gnu.org: [postmaster@sourceware] failure notice (fwd)]

[Jim Kingdon]

> We should just create a FAQ entry and point folks at it.

Not sure what you had in mind, but our DUL use is covered at
http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html (item #7).  Suggested changes to
that page are welcome but I doubt we should try to duplicate all the
detailed ins and outs which people can read about on the DUL, RBL, &c
sites.

In this specific case, I'd suggest to the guy that he run smtpauth on
his static IP'd server.  But if he comes up with some reason that
won't work, well, yeah, it is a "stopping spam is more important to us
than X" thing.  Just be polite.  And yes, you can ignore him if you
want to, but in my experience I was usually able to send people away
feeling that they understood our position.