On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 10:21:51AM +0200, Dave Neary wrote: > > Hi all, > > I just sent a mail to a gimp.org alias, and it bounced with the > following problem: The gimp.org postmaster address is a much more appropriate place for this sort of thing than the developer list. Next time, use the proper channels, please, so that things can come to my attention sooner. > >This message was created automatically by mail delivery software (Exim). > > > >A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its > >recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed: > > > > 01079@xxxxxxxxxx > > (generated from brix@xxxxxxxx) > > SMTP error from remote mailer after RCPT TO:<01079@xxxxxxxxxx>: > > host mail1.iha.dk [130.225.184.39]: 554 Service unavailable; Client > > host [128.32.112.247] blocked using bl.spamcop.net; Blocked - see > > http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?128.32.112.247 > > 128.32.112.247 is shill.xcf.berkeley.edu, which is presumably some kind > of gateway for gimp.org mail. So getting onto spamcop's blacklist > probably means that gimp.org mails aren't going to be too reliable for a > while. Using spamcop is a pretty dumb idea for a university to do, but then again, the admins at brix's university have show themselves to be rather not so bright in the past. What probably happened is an email with a forged from address that happened to be a spam trap got sent to an invalid gimp.org address, which generated a bounce message which got flagged as spam. I've turned on initial verification of receivers to mitigate this. Note that it's not actually listed in the db anymore. So mails are reliable, and your statement was unfounded conjecture. > Does anyone know what's wrong with beta.gimp.org at the moment? It's > mostly down, but it was up for a while yesterday evening. It's having some hardware or driver issues, which I've not nailed down yet. -Yosh
