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