Re: Repeated? Transient Delivery Failure (fwd)

>    I'm getting one of these every 4 hours or so.....
> Can it be fixed?

It's that idiot at colina.com --- AFAICT he's currently bouncing all
hackers mail back to the author and any To/CC addressees, including the
list submission address.  I'm not seeing his author bounces anymore
because I have 24.244.157.4 router-blocked, but I am still getting
"Stalled due to duplicate message-ID" notices from the listserv every
time I post something to hackers and he regurgitates it.  I shudder to
think of what's happening to Marc's moderation queue.

It looks like my router block is causing him to send complaints to the
original authors of regurgitated messages about how he can't deliver my
copy, any time I'm in the To: list :-(.  I didn't think it was possible
to misconfigure a mail daemon that badly, but he seems to have managed it.

The correct solution is for Marc to forcibly unsubscribe
gpratt@colina.com, but I have not been able to get Marc to do anything
about it (he does have a lot of more-significant problems on his plate
at the moment).  In the meantime, a twit filter on your end might be
in order, if you can set one up easily.

            regards, tom lane


> ------------ Forwarded Message ------------
> Date: Wednesday, May 14, 2003 10:49:41 -0400
> From: MDaemon@colina.mail
> To: ler@lerctr.org
> Cc:
> Subject: Transient Delivery Failure

> The attached message had transient non-fatal delivery errors

> THIS IS A WARNING MESSAGE ONLY - YOU DO NOT NEED TO RESEND YOUR MESSAGE!

> This server is configured to automatically retry delivery at configured
> intervals.  Subsequent attempts to deliver this message are pending.

> Failed address: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us

> --- Session Transcript ---
>  MX-record resolution of [sss.pgh.pa.us] in progress (DNS Server:
> 208.246.140.194)...  P=020 D=sss.pgh.pa.us TTL=(474)
> MX=[sss-backup.pgh.pa.us] {216.151.103.158}  P=010 D=sss.pgh.pa.us
> TTL=(474) MX=[sss.pgh.pa.us] {192.204.191.242}  Attempting MX: P=010
> D=sss.pgh.pa.us TTL=(474) MX=[sss.pgh.pa.us] {192.204.191.242}  Attempting
> SMTP connection to [192.204.191.242 : 25]
>  Waiting for socket connection...
>  Winsock Error 10060 The connection timed out.
>  Attempting MX: P=020 D=sss.pgh.pa.us TTL=(474) MX=[sss-backup.pgh.pa.us]
> {216.151.103.158}  Attempting SMTP connection to [216.151.103.158 : 25]
>  Waiting for socket connection...
>  Winsock Error 10060 The connection timed out.
>  This message is 0 days old; it has 5 days left to get delivered
> --- End Transcript ---
> : Message contains [1] file attachments

> ---------- End Forwarded Message ----------



> --
> Larry Rosenman                     http://www.lerctr.org/~ler
> Phone: +1 972-414-9812                 E-Mail: ler@lerctr.org
> US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749



> --==========1853349384==========
> Content-Type: message/rfc822; name="Transient Delivery Failure"

> Return-Path: <MAILER-DAEMON@lerctr.org>
> Received: from colina.mail ([24.244.157.4])
>     by lerami.lerctr.org (8.12.9/8.12.9/20030225) with ESMTP id h4EEmGKK019492
>     for <ler@lerctr.org>; Wed, 14 May 2003 09:48:18 -0500 (CDT)
> Received: from colina.mail [192.168.15.10] by colina.mail [192.168.15.10]
>     with RAW (MDaemon.PRO.v6.0.7.R)
>     for <ler@lerctr.org>; Wed, 14 May 2003 10:49:41 -0400
> Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 10:49:41 -0400
> From: MDaemon@colina.mail
> Reply-To: BadMsgQ@colina.mail
> Precedence: bulk
> X-MDSend-Notifications-To: [trash]
> Subject: Transient Delivery Failure
> To: ler@lerctr.org
> X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: ler@lerctr.org
> Message-ID: <MDAEMON0600200305141049.AA4941606@colina.mail>
> X-Actual-From: MDaemon@colina.mail
> X-Return-Path: <>
> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/)
> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.3 required=5.0
>     tests=BAYES_30,NO_REAL_NAME,SIGNATURE_LONG_SPARSE
>     version=2.54
> X-Spam-Level:
> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.54 (1.174.2.17-2003-05-11-exp)
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="==========895990889=========="

> --==========895990889==========
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> The attached message had transient non-fatal delivery errors

> THIS IS A WARNING MESSAGE ONLY - YOU DO NOT NEED TO RESEND YOUR MESSAGE!

> This server is configured to automatically retry delivery at configured
> intervals.  Subsequent attempts to deliver this message are pending.

> Failed address: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us

> --- Session Transcript ---
>  MX-record resolution of [sss.pgh.pa.us] in progress (DNS Server: 208.246.140.194)...
>  P=020 D=sss.pgh.pa.us TTL=(474) MX=[sss-backup.pgh.pa.us] {216.151.103.158}
>  P=010 D=sss.pgh.pa.us TTL=(474) MX=[sss.pgh.pa.us] {192.204.191.242}
>  Attempting MX: P=010 D=sss.pgh.pa.us TTL=(474) MX=[sss.pgh.pa.us] {192.204.191.242}
>  Attempting SMTP connection to [192.204.191.242 : 25]
>  Waiting for socket connection...
>  Winsock Error 10060 The connection timed out.
>  Attempting MX: P=020 D=sss.pgh.pa.us TTL=(474) MX=[sss-backup.pgh.pa.us] {216.151.103.158}
>  Attempting SMTP connection to [216.151.103.158 : 25]
>  Waiting for socket connection...
>  Winsock Error 10060 The connection timed out.
>  This message is 0 days old; it has 5 days left to get delivered
> --- End Transcript ---
> : Message contains [1] file attachments

> --==========895990889==========
> Content-Type: message/rfc822;
>  name="Re: [HACKERS] GUC and postgresql.conf docs"

> Received: from ns2.profit.net ([208.26.43.26]) by colina.mail ([])
>     with DomainPOP (MDaemon.PRO.v6.0.7.R)
>     for <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>; Tue, 13 May 2003 12:23:51 -0400
> Received: from relay2.pgsql.com ([64.49.215.143])
>     by ns2.profit.net ([208.26.43.26])
>     with SMTP (MDaemon.PRO.v6.5.2.R)
>     for <gpratt@colina.com>; Tue, 13 May 2003 12:35:03 -0400
> Received: from postgresql.org (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
>     by relay2.pgsql.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
>     id A0970146AC0; Tue, 13 May 2003 12:21:20 -0400 (EDT)
> X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
> Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
>     by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BE6F47636B
>     for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; Tue, 13 May 2003 12:20:39 -0400 (EDT)
> Received: from lerami.lerctr.org (lerami.lerctr.org [207.158.72.11])
>     by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B34DD474E42
>     for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; Tue, 13 May 2003 12:20:38 -0400 (EDT)
> Received: from lerlaptop.iadfw.net (lerlaptop.iadfw.net [206.66.13.21])
>     (authenticated bits=0)
>     by lerami.lerctr.org (8.12.9/8.12.9/20030225) with ESMTP id h4DGKQKK000260;
>     Tue, 13 May 2003 11:20:27 -0500 (CDT)
> Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 11:20:26 -0500
> From: Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org>
> To: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
>     Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
> Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] GUC and postgresql.conf docs
> Message-ID: <95700000.1052842826@lerlaptop.iadfw.net>
> In-Reply-To: <200305130916.44525.josh@agliodbs.com>
> References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0305131002430.1617-100000@peter.localdomain>
>  <7932.1052834070@sss.pgh.pa.us> <200305130916.44525.josh@agliodbs.com>
> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.0.3 (Linux/x86)
> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/)
> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-16.3 required=5.0
>     tests=BAYES_01,IN_REP_TO,REFERENCES
>     autolearn=ham    version=2.50
> X-Spam-Level:
> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp)
> Precedence: bulk
> Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
> X-Lookup-Warning: MAIL lookup on pgsql-hackers-owner+M38831@postgresql.org does not match 64.49.215.143
> Reply-To: pgsql-hackers-owner+M38831@postgresql.org
> X-MDRemoteIP: 208.26.43.26
> X-MDRcpt-To: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us
> X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; FORMAT=flowed
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Content-Disposition: inline



> --On Tuesday, May 13, 2003 09:16:44 -0700 Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
> wrote:

>> Guys,
>>
>> One dumb question:
>>
>> What numbers are INT_MAX and DBL_MAX in C?
> The maximum for that type that can be represented.  It's platform dependent.

> on FreeBSD 4:
> #define INT_MAX         0x7fffffff      /* max value for an int */
> #define DBL_MAX         1.7976931348623157E+308



> --
> Larry Rosenman                     http://www.lerctr.org/~ler
> Phone: +1 972-414-9812                 E-Mail: ler@lerctr.org
> US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749


> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo@postgresql.org

> --==========895990889==========--

> --==========1853349384==========--