Getting a "mail forwarding loop" notice for messages sent to discuss
list. Does that mean anything to anybody?
Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender.eml (7.34 KB)
Tyler Mitchell (OSGeo) wrote:
Getting a "mail forwarding loop" notice for messages sent to discuss
list. Does that mean anything to anybody?
Tyler,
Markus has observed the same thing, and filed a ticket about it -
hmm, I can't find it. Perhaps he did not.
I've looked into it briefly and I have no idea what is going wrong.
I'm hoping someone more email savvy than me will look into it.
Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam@pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush | Geospatial Programmer for Rent
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 01:17:29PM -0500, Frank Warmerdam wrote:
I'm hoping someone more email savvy than me will look into it.
This is most likely caused by a tiny Postfix configuration issue wrt.
those domains/hosts which are to be considered as being local ones.
I'll try to dig into it later today (didn't have many spare cycles
during the past days),
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 7:17 PM, Frank Warmerdam <warmerdam@pobox.com> wrote:
Tyler Mitchell (OSGeo) wrote:
Getting a "mail forwarding loop" notice for messages sent to discuss
list. Does that mean anything to anybody?Tyler,
Markus has observed the same thing, and filed a ticket about it -
hmm, I can't find it. Perhaps he did not.
I did not because trac was down when it happened. So I reported
in this list.
I've looked into it briefly and I have no idea what is going wrong.
I'm hoping someone more email savvy than me will look into it.
Something must have been changed a week or so ago.
Best
Markus
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 08:10:44PM +0100, Markus Neteler wrote:
Something must have been changed a week or so ago.
.... at least not on the Postfix side: All the config files have been
unchanged since 2008.
The error message doesn't look unfamiliar to me and/but in most of the
cases the 'common' recipes didn't work. I'll have to have a closer look
at the error message, maybe we're having a situation where a Postfix
configuration fault is being triggered after a recent change in one of
the lists ?
BTW, for the server migration I propose to add a mailman transport for
Postfix - yes, and I'm willing to add the respective configuration 
Cheers,
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 08:10:44PM +0100, Markus Neteler wrote:
Something must have been changed a week or so ago.
I suspect that user "arnaud.degroof@spacebel.be" has set up an OSgeo
EMail reflector
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cool - does mailman end up unsubscribing these kinds of loops?
Martin Spott wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 08:10:44PM +0100, Markus Neteler wrote:
Something must have been changed a week or so ago.
I suspect that user "arnaud.degroof@spacebel.be" has set up an OSgeo
EMail reflectorMartin.
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 01:56:29PM -0800, Tyler Mitchell (OSGeo) wrote:
Cool - does mailman end up unsubscribing these kinds of loops?
Even if it could, the looped EMail doesn't get that far down in the
queue. Instead, Postfix detects the loop via the "Delivered-To" header
before the looped EMail gets handed over to Mailman.
BTW, while doing diagnostics, I had accidentially disabled the Mailman
list addresses for a while, so a couple of people might have gotten
"Recipient unknown" messages when sending EMail to a list (due to the
fact that 'postmap' doesn't handle the Mailman aliases table format).
Things are now back in proper state - otherwise you would not have been
able to read my previous message. I'm very sorry,
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin Spott wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 08:10:44PM +0100, Markus Neteler wrote:
Something must have been changed a week or so ago.
I suspect that user "arnaud.degroof@spacebel.be" has set up an OSgeo
EMail reflector
Martin,
I have marked this subscriber to the discuss list as "nomail".
Folks - if the problem persists let me know.
> BTW, for the server migration I propose to add a mailman transport for
> Postfix - yes, and I'm willing to add the respective configuration
Will this help avoid the problem Markus and Tyler experienced?
Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam@pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush | Geospatial Programmer for Rent
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 11:18:15PM +0100, Martin Spott wrote:
Even if it could, the looped EMail doesn't get that far down in the
queue. Instead, Postfix detects the loop via the "Delivered-To" header
before the looped EMail gets handed over to Mailman.
I should probably add a little comment:
The messages people have seen here (related to the loop) do _not_
indicate a mailing list malfunction. Every list submission has been
delivered properly to the list and to every of it's recipients (at
least those who have a functional inbox).
The respective list-maintainers are encouraged to deal with the
situation either by removing the mentioned address from their lists -
and probably tell the candidate why they're doing so - or, maybe
preferred, at least by asking him to check his EMail settings. As far
as I can tell, the user in question is subscribed to the following
lists:
Discuss, Francophone, mapguide-users
Cheers,
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I can follow up with the user, unless someone else has tried to.
Tyler
Martin Spott wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 11:18:15PM +0100, Martin Spott wrote:
Even if it could, the looped EMail doesn't get that far down in the
queue. Instead, Postfix detects the loop via the "Delivered-To" header
before the looped EMail gets handed over to Mailman.I should probably add a little comment:
The messages people have seen here (related to the loop) do _not_
indicate a mailing list malfunction. Every list submission has been
delivered properly to the list and to every of it's recipients (at
least those who have a functional inbox).The respective list-maintainers are encouraged to deal with the
situation either by removing the mentioned address from their lists -
and probably tell the candidate why they're doing so - or, maybe
preferred, at least by asking him to check his EMail settings. As far
as I can tell, the user in question is subscribed to the following
lists:Discuss, Francophone, mapguide-users
Cheers,
Martin.
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 05:47:48PM -0500, Frank Warmerdam wrote:
Martin Spott wrote:
> BTW, for the server migration I propose to add a mailman transport for
> Postfix - yes, and I'm willing to add the respective configurationWill this help avoid the problem Markus and Tyler experienced?
No, it won't. Adding a mailman transport is just providing a short-cut
between Postfix and Mailman, thus circumventing the aliases lookup of
the local delivery for incoming list submissions.
Cheers,
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------