Fri, 19 Jan 1996 09:08:43 EST
|
On Thu, 18 Jan 1996 23:47:00 -0500 Norm Aleks <[log in to unmask]>
said:
>One example: last I looked (and this may have changed, please don't
>flame me if so), LISTSERV for Unix would not interpret MIME-format
>errors.
Version 1.8c will support the Notary format errors (the code has already
been written and tested a long time ago). When 1.8b was released, this
was still in the draft stage, and many issues were still open. It would
have been a waste of resources to implement something that was likely to
change before the final revision, and for which there was virtually no
existing MTA base (and thus no immediate benefit, nor any decent way to
test the code).
>Another: lots of errors come from Taylor uucp sites
I wonder how much longer non-UUCP software is going to have to be kludged
to make up for the deficiencies of UUCP. I hate to point this out, but a
significant fraction of sendmail configuration errors are due to an
incorrect UUCP rewrite rule.
>Another: last I looked (again, this might've changed), AOL had error
>messages that were unique and not recognized by LISTSERV.
I agree that this is *very* annoying, but I don't agree that the solution
is to add support for AOL's private message format (which could change
overnight). AOL is currently using sendmail 8.6, and sendmail 8.7
supports the Notary format, which LISTSERV 1.8c handles. This is a much
better solution for *everyone*, not just LISTSERV owners. Even if I were
to write code to support AOL bounces today, very few owners would get it
before the next version of LISTSERV is released.
Let me put it this way... L-Soft runs the largest and the third largest
LISTSERV lists in the network. We have to pay the staff that processes
the bounces, and that's a LOT of bounces. So, believe me, we are fully
aware of the inconvenience.
Eric
|
|
|