1 |
On 2023-01-14, Peter Humphrey wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
> On Saturday, 14 January 2023 07:00:29 GMT Nuno Silva wrote: |
4 |
>> On 2023-01-13, Peter Humphrey wrote: |
5 |
>> > Hello list, |
6 |
>> > |
7 |
>> > Ever since the new year I've been getting a bounce message from this list |
8 |
>> > - 19 of them so far. The first of those listed one message twice, most of |
9 |
>> > the others six times. The message was 200359. |
10 |
>> > |
11 |
>> > I don't know what that message was, but why is the system Out There |
12 |
> having |
13 |
>> > such a hard time with it? |
14 |
>> |
15 |
>> Was the message from the list software or from a Microsoft system? |
16 |
> |
17 |
> I don't know - I haven't received it as far as I know. The only archive |
18 |
> entries I've found are of this conversation. |
19 |
|
20 |
And *now* I haven't received one of these messages I was talking about |
21 |
(which would usually appear for every post of mine to the list, albeit |
22 |
possibly delayed by a few hours), so I guess either the forwarding |
23 |
problem was fixed or that person is not subscribed to the list anymore. |
24 |
|
25 |
>> There's possibly one subscriber that has configured their |
26 |
>> Exchange/Outlook account to forward e-mails to a Gmail account, and |
27 |
>> forwarding as implemented by Microsoft apparently isn't done correctly |
28 |
>> and so "SPF" checks run by Gmail are failing. |
29 |
> |
30 |
> Hmm. Would that cause the message to me to fail, in particular? |
31 |
|
32 |
No, in the case I was writing about, it'd only cause you to get these |
33 |
failure messages/reports delivered to you, I think precisely because of |
34 |
the incorrect Microsoft forwarding implementation that'd present you as |
35 |
the sender. |
36 |
|
37 |
So it is delivery *to* you that's failing? Hm, seeing you mentioned one |
38 |
of these message numbers that are internal to the list, I think I now |
39 |
understand what kind of bounce message you're talking about, sorry for |
40 |
the confusion. |
41 |
|
42 |
Now was there (I recall asking about this previously, but I forgot what |
43 |
the answer was) a way to get a message-ID from that internal number, or |
44 |
at least a way to get the address of the message's archive copy on the |
45 |
gentoo website? |
46 |
|
47 |
>> I tried to send a message to this list about this topic back in November |
48 |
>> but it never made through, perhaps it was filtered because it quoted |
49 |
>> some of the error messages. |
50 |
|
51 |
-- |
52 |
Nuno Silva |