>
> Below is an error message, one of several of the sort. I don't need help
> figuring out who's sub is the likely culprit, as I've already done that
> and she's been deleted.  What I'm curious about is the total lack of, to
> me, real information.
>
> Nowhere can I find any info, that I can interpret, to tell me who
> was to have been the recipient.  And the subject line is arcane,
> to say the least:
> "Subject: Returned mail: Insufficient permission"
> Insufficient permission from whom for what, is what I want to know.
> I guessed it was trying to tell me the person no longer has an account,
> or that warp6 has been broken for 3 weeks and can't deliver mail for
> some reason.  Either, it's delete time.
>
> I assume I'm going to continue getting these things for the next three
> weeks.  The error message is complete as I got it, nothing followed
> the header from warp6.
>
>         Douglas Winship    Austin, Texas    [log in to unmask]
>                     Secondary AUTOCAT Listowner
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Sun, 15 May 1994 16:57:13 -0400
> From: BITNET list server at UBVM <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: AUTOCAT: error report from WARP6.CS.MISU.NODAK.EDU
>
> The enclosed mail file has been identified as a delivery error for list
> AUTOCAT because it was sent to the reserved 'owner-autocat' mailbox.
>
> ------------------------------ Message in error -------------------------------
> Received: from UBVM (NJE origin SMTP@UBVM) by UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU (LMail
>           V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 9613; Sun, 15 May 1994 16:57:12 -0400
> Received: from warp6.cs.misu.NoDak.edu by UBVM.cc.buffalo.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
>    with TCP; Sun, 15 May 94 16:57:11 EDT
> Received: from ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu by warp6.cs.misu.NoDak.edu (AIX 3.2/UCB
>           5.64/4.03)
>           id AA16394; Sun, 24 Apr 1994 23:59:01 -0500
> Date: Sun, 24 Apr 1994 23:59:01 -0500
> From: [log in to unmask] (Mail Delivery Subsystem)
> Subject: Returned mail: Insufficient permission
> Message-Id: <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <@UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU:[log in to unmask]>
>
I had some of these only worse, since it was a question of a
government comunication from a ministry and was supposedly refused
permission at a US military instalation. I mean that person was
refused permission to read the document from the foreign government
ministry. I believe that you will find that the routing etc. is the
real source of the problem, because when I enquired the message had
not really been refused nor bounced but received. You have to watch that
you are not deleting people from your list who are also the victims of
internet routing--Paul.
 
--
 
Dr. Paul S. di Virgilio,  University of Toronto  [log in to unmask]