Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

Am 13.06.2014 12:20, schrieb Reuben Farrelly: > On 13/06/2014 8:09 PM, Nick Edwards wrote: >> On 6/11/14, Jost Krieger wrote: >>> On Wed Jun 11 12:03:24 2014, Reindl Harald wrote: >>> Cisco routers by default mangle DNS traffic, break zone transfers or even put befor all CNAME blocks a

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

On 13/06/2014 8:09 PM, Nick Edwards wrote: On 6/11/14, Jost Krieger wrote: On Wed Jun 11 12:03:24 2014, Reindl Harald wrote: Cisco routers by default mangle DNS traffic, break zone transfers or even put befor all CNAME blocks a $TTL 0 line never appeared on the master until you disable DNS AL

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

Am 13.06.2014 12:17, schrieb Reindl Harald: > Am 13.06.2014 12:09, schrieb Nick Edwards: >> On 6/11/14, Jost Krieger wrote: >>> On Wed Jun 11 12:03:24 2014, Reindl Harald wrote: >>> Cisco routers by default mangle DNS traffic, break zone transfers or even put befor all CNAME blocks a $T

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

Am 13.06.2014 12:09, schrieb Nick Edwards: > On 6/11/14, Jost Krieger wrote: >> On Wed Jun 11 12:03:24 2014, Reindl Harald wrote: >> >>> Cisco routers by default mangle DNS traffic, break zone transfers >>> or even put befor all CNAME blocks a $TTL 0 line never appeared >>> on the master until yo

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

On 6/11/14, Jost Krieger wrote: > On Wed Jun 11 12:03:24 2014, Reindl Harald wrote: > >> Cisco routers by default mangle DNS traffic, break zone transfers >> or even put befor all CNAME blocks a $TTL 0 line never appeared >> on the master until you disable DNS ALG for UDP and TCP > > I believe tha

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

On Tue Jun 10 12:31:47 2014, Professa Dementia wrote: > > On 6/9/2014 7:26 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote: > > I am not proposing a new standard, simply pointing out that breaking an > established protocol (by removing the [Dovecot] subject identifier) > because of a flawed anti-spam system is not in pe

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

On Wednesday 11 June 2014 05:20:47 Reindl Harald did opine And Gene did reply: > Am 11.06.2014 11:15, schrieb Professa Dementia: > > On 6/11/2014 1:51 AM, Frerich Raabe wrote: > >> On 2014-06-10 17:23, Koenraad Lelong wrote: > >>> op 10-06-14 17:12, Reindl Harald schreef: > than you have crap

RE: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

n, s. > Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 12:03:24 +0200 > From: h.rei...@thelounge.net > To: dovecot@dovecot.org > Subject: Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone > > > Am 11.06.2014 11:30, schrieb Koenraad Lelong: >> op 10-06-14 17:37, Koenraad Lelong schreef:

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

Am 11.06.2014 12:21, schrieb Jost Krieger: > On Wed Jun 11 12:03:24 2014, Reindl Harald wrote: > >> Cisco routers by default mangle DNS traffic, break zone transfers >> or even put befor all CNAME blocks a $TTL 0 line never appeared >> on the master until you disable DNS ALG for UDP and TCP > >

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

On Wed Jun 11 12:03:24 2014, Reindl Harald wrote: > Cisco routers by default mangle DNS traffic, break zone transfers > or even put befor all CNAME blocks a $TTL 0 line never appeared > on the master until you disable DNS ALG for UDP and TCP I believe that Cisco equipment will do such things, but

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

Am 11.06.2014 11:30, schrieb Koenraad Lelong: > op 10-06-14 17:37, Koenraad Lelong schreef: > >> I looked at some messages on the server. Not trace of those List-lines. >> I think I will get in touch with Watchguard to see if they remove those >> lines. > > I subscribed to dovecot with a home-ac

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

op 10-06-14 17:37, Koenraad Lelong schreef: I looked at some messages on the server. Not trace of those List-lines. I think I will get in touch with Watchguard to see if they remove those lines. I subscribed to dovecot with a home-account. There I do have those RFC2919 lines. I also just "whi

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

Am 11.06.2014 11:15, schrieb Professa Dementia: > On 6/11/2014 1:51 AM, Frerich Raabe wrote: >> On 2014-06-10 17:23, Koenraad Lelong wrote: >>> op 10-06-14 17:12, Reindl Harald schreef: than you have crap software somewhere on your side >>> >>> What did I do to get such reply ? >> >> Don't bo

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

On 6/11/2014 1:51 AM, Frerich Raabe wrote: > On 2014-06-10 17:23, Koenraad Lelong wrote: >> op 10-06-14 17:12, Reindl Harald schreef: >>> than you have crap software somewhere on your side >> >> What did I do to get such reply ? > > Don't bother paying too much attention, Harald has been quite the

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

On 2014-06-10 17:23, Koenraad Lelong wrote: op 10-06-14 17:12, Reindl Harald schreef: than you have crap software somewhere on your side What did I do to get such reply ? Don't bother paying too much attention, Harald has been quite the primadonna ever since I joined this list. Pretty sure

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

In this list we have Timo and many other people very skilled in dovecot and mail related stuff. I read the considerations and I suppose they are right, but ... Also there are people like me that are lower profile sysadmins. Filtering mail isn't a problem, but, in my opinion, having the tag [Do

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

Am 11.06.2014 07:28, schrieb Nick Edwards: > Nothing. Reindel has always been an abusive troll if somebody wants to feel absued he will find always a reason - calling software stripping headers out of mails is not a good one to feel so so shut up until you can't distinguish between firt name and

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

; by talvi.dovecot.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51A3023584 >> for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2014 20:28:39 + (UTC) >> Received: from [192.168.10.103] (cs181255018.pp.htv.fi [82.181.255.18]) >> by wursti.dovecot.fi (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6ABD221D30 >>

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

If DMARC (the new kid on the block), gets broken by simple things like subject changes on lists, then DMARC is broken, I wont go into the other 9 key reasons I consider it useless because as you said this is not the list for it. On 6/11/14, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote: > Professa, > > I suggest to

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

Nothing. Reindel has always been an abusive troll On 6/11/14, Koenraad Lelong wrote: > op 10-06-14 17:12, Reindl Harald schreef: >> >> > >> >> than you have crap software somewhere on your side > > What did I do to get such reply ? > > Koenraad >

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

Professa, I suggest to take this discussion to the DKIM mailing list or even better to DMARC at IETF. Discussing the usefulness of DKIM or DMARC is better done there. Until people at IETF come up with a solution for DMARC that works for all participants most MLs, just like this, are better off av

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

On 6/9/2014 7:26 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote: > The main reason is DKIM, which is starting to be a real problem. I have not used DKIM much. My mail server and client mostly deal with SPF. I have a filter that colorizes messages that have no SPF or a missing DKIM or bad DKIM signature. I *have* not

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

On 06/09/2014 01:27 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote: > > Another thing I'm wondering about is if I should allow text/html parts, > because removing them will also break the DKIM signatures. Or mainly I'd like > to allow only multipart/alternative with text/plain + text/html, but I don't > think I can c

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

Am 10.06.2014 17:23, schrieb Koenraad Lelong: > op 10-06-14 17:12, Reindl Harald schreef: >> >> than you have crap software somewhere on your side > > What did I do to get such reply? are you a piece of software or why do you take "crap software" personally against yourself? you should have re

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

On 10-6-2014 17:23, Koenraad Lelong wrote: op 10-06-14 17:12, Reindl Harald schreef: than you have crap software somewhere on your side What did I do to get such reply ? Koenraad Because you have crap software ;) It's not caused by Thunderbird itself (it might be an add-on!) I'

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

op 10-06-14 17:15, Bernd Petrovitsch schreef: FTR: I find snip List-Id: Dovecot Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 11:04:28AM -0400, Chris Young wrote: > Gmail doesn't let me filter on message headers so I've updated my filter as > follows Yes it does. I use this: (list:dovecot OR to:dovecot) It matches both mail received from the mailing-list and those I send to the mailing-list. +

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

op 10-06-14 17:15, Bernd Petrovitsch schreef: snip in every mail header (=> RFC-2919). Is someone filtering headers on your side or the MUA just not displaying really all of them? I'm using Thunderbird as MUA. I'll look at the messages on the server. Never noticed before there was

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

op 10-06-14 17:12, Reindl Harald schreef: than you have crap software somewhere on your side What did I do to get such reply ? Koenraad

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

with ESMTP id 51A3023584 for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2014 20:28:39 + (UTC) Received: from [192.168.10.103] (cs181255018.pp.htv.fi [82.181.255.18]) by wursti.dovecot.fi (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6ABD221D30 for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2014 22:27:43 +0200 (CEST) From: Timo Sirainen Subject: Subject tag [Dov

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

On Die, 2014-06-10 at 11:04 -0400, Chris Young wrote: > Gmail doesn't let me filter on message headers so I've updated my filter as > follows One more reason not to use it;-) [...] > On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Koenraad Lelong < > dove...@ace-electronics.be> wrote: [...] > > Just wanted to

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2014 20:28:39 + (UTC) > Received: from [192.168.10.103] (cs181255018.pp.htv.fi [82.181.255.18]) > by wursti.dovecot.fi (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6ABD221D30 > for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2014 22:27:43 +0200 (CEST) > From: Timo Sirainen iki.fi> > Content

Re: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

(CEST) From: Timo Sirainen iki.fi> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone Message-Id: Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 23:27:41 +0300 To: Dovecot Mailing List Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.2\)) X-Mailer:

Subject tag [Dovecot] is gone

I've actually been thinking about it almost since the beginning. It's just been annoying waste of space on my screen. And more importantly nowadays it's also breaking DKIM/DMARC signatures. So if somebody still uses Subject-based filtering it's about time to switch to List-ID header based filter