9front - general discussion about 9front
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [9front] test
@ 2021-08-21 22:29 cinap_lenrek
  2021-08-21 23:49 ` Stuart Morrow
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: cinap_lenrek @ 2021-08-21 22:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2021-08-21 22:29 [9front] test cinap_lenrek
@ 2021-08-21 23:49 ` Stuart Morrow
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Stuart Morrow @ 2021-08-21 23:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

hi

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* [9front] test
@ 2021-09-06  1:02 sl
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: sl @ 2021-09-06  1:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

test

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2021-08-25 14:46     ` ori
@ 2021-08-25 14:56       ` Stanley Lieber
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Stanley Lieber @ 2021-08-25 14:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

testicle is a go library that automatically posts regression test output on buzzfeed.

sl


> On Aug 25, 2021, at 10:50 AM, ori@eigenstate.org wrote:
> 
> Quoth kvik@a-b.xyz:
>> Testicle.
>> 
> 
> That's what you get when a test drips and then
> freezes, right?
> 
> 


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2021-08-25 14:41   ` kvik
@ 2021-08-25 14:46     ` ori
  2021-08-25 14:56       ` Stanley Lieber
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: ori @ 2021-08-25 14:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

Quoth kvik@a-b.xyz:
> Testicle.
> 

That's what you get when a test drips and then
freezes, right?


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2021-08-25  9:11 ` Pavel Renev
@ 2021-08-25 14:41   ` kvik
  2021-08-25 14:46     ` ori
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: kvik @ 2021-08-25 14:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

Testicle.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2021-08-25  8:41 cinap_lenrek
@ 2021-08-25  9:11 ` Pavel Renev
  2021-08-25 14:41   ` kvik
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Renev @ 2021-08-25  9:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

Also test.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* [9front] test
@ 2021-08-25  8:41 cinap_lenrek
  2021-08-25  9:11 ` Pavel Renev
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: cinap_lenrek @ 2021-08-25  8:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

test

--
cinap

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2020-09-22 12:57             ` Ethan Gardener
@ 2020-09-22 13:12               ` hiro
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: hiro @ 2020-09-22 13:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

thankfully we need not decide (yet) :)


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2020-09-21 18:42           ` Stanley Lieber
  2020-09-21 21:40             ` hiro
@ 2020-09-22 12:57             ` Ethan Gardener
  2020-09-22 13:12               ` hiro
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: Ethan Gardener @ 2020-09-22 12:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

FYI, Gnu.org changed its mailing lists to not munge in October last year. (The explanation was approximately 10 times as long as this entire thread but not as clear, IMO. ;) The default for Mailman was also changed at that time.

I'm a little bit in favour of just not munging, but that's not a deeply considered opinion. I think it would only impact people who don't filter their mail (understandable?) and people who filter on subject (bad practice?).


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2020-09-21 21:40             ` hiro
@ 2020-09-21 22:20               ` hiro
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: hiro @ 2020-09-21 22:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

here's when it all started ;)
https://thehackernews.com/2014/04/yahoos-new-dmarc-policy-destroys-every.html


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2020-09-21 18:42           ` Stanley Lieber
@ 2020-09-21 21:40             ` hiro
  2020-09-21 22:20               ` hiro
  2020-09-22 12:57             ` Ethan Gardener
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: hiro @ 2020-09-21 21:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

best to ask these people: https://www.mail-archive.com/mailop@mailop.org

imo if dkim+dmarc becomes popular enough I do expect that we (mailing
list operators) should change our convention and stop mangling headers
like the subject, from, or body of the mail.

but this is also only viable if people don't continue to use spf +
dmarc (!=none) without valid dkim, in the longer term. I'd say then
it's their own fault and there should be no way out provided by the
mailing list operator.

but i'd certainly wish that NONE of any above mentioned technologies
were used by anybody lest enforced. so definitely not desirable.

at this point i don't think there's a need for action. the early
adopters of strict dmarc setups deserve whatever punishment they are
experiencing for the upcoming while...


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2020-09-21 17:58         ` hiro
@ 2020-09-21 18:42           ` Stanley Lieber
  2020-09-21 21:40             ` hiro
  2020-09-22 12:57             ` Ethan Gardener
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Stanley Lieber @ 2020-09-21 18:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

On September 21, 2020 1:58:17 PM EDT, hiro <23hiro@gmail.com> wrote:
>option 1 and 3 would cover that
>
>On 9/21/20, Stanley Lieber <sl@stanleylieber.com> wrote:
>> On September 21, 2020 1:36:11 PM EDT, ori@eigenstate.org wrote:
>>>> this example has cleared up for me why gmail does such stupidity,
>>>> sadly they were misleading and claimed the spam classification was
>>>due
>>>> to "similar to other spam".
>>>>
>>>> i can confirm that most of the incorrectly classified spam messages
>i
>>>> get in gmail seem to have dmarc not set to none.
>>>> i checked a few exemplary senders, one of which being a web forum
>>>with
>>>> quite a few messages every day.
>>>>
>>>> gmail itself also has it's dmarc set to none.
>>>>
>>>> so while gmail wants to force you to use dmarc (unverified,
>somebody
>>>> claimed that on irc once) they don't seem to think anybody should
>>>have
>>>> to act upon it in any way ;)
>>>
>>>I'll pile on and summarize the discussion from cat-v
>>>earlier today:
>>>
>>>Kvik's email was being shitcanned on gmail because
>>>of his dkim conflicting with our munging. Dkim signs
>>>headers that it expects anyone forwarding mail to
>>>leave untouched. Kvik's list was excessive, but most
>>>dkim configs will be unhappy with our rewrites, since
>>>they want the subject left untouched.
>>>
>>>That leaves us 3 options:
>>>
>>>	1. Strip out DKIM entirely from forwarded emails.
>>>	2. Don't mess with any headers we don't need to
>>>	3. Implement DKIM, munge to our heart's content,
>>>	   and re-sign.
>>>
>>>My vote is in favor of 2 right now, and maybe 3 if we
>>>ever implement dkim in upas.
>>>
>>>This seems like a good summary of the situation.
>>>
>>>	https://begriffs.com/posts/2018-09-18-dmarc-mailing-list.html
>>>
>>>For reference, the headers gmail doesn't want us to touch are:
>>>
>>>	mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
>>>
>>>Not sure what the other big providers want.
>>
>> how does every other mailing list in the world manage modifying the
>subject
>> line?
>>
>> sl
>>

my point is, the implication is that dkim is both universally expected and desirable. is that really the case? it seems like just glossing over the question is silly. we need to make a decision (and modify it later, if necessary). if we need dkim, we should implement it. if not, not. right?

sl


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2020-09-21 17:51         ` ori
  2020-09-21 17:59           ` ori
@ 2020-09-21 18:27           ` Kurt H Maier
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Kurt H Maier @ 2020-09-21 18:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 10:51:46AM -0700, ori@eigenstate.org wrote:
> 
>  From a non-comprehensive survey (some google groups,
> 9fans): Option 3: they rewrite stuff and sign it again
> with their own key.
> 
> OpenBSD mailing lists forward without munging.
> 

This is why on some lists (I think TUHS, maybe others) you get some
messages from the recipient (these are from non-DKIM senders) and some
messages from "Original Sender via TUHS" with a TUHS reply-to and TUHS
DKIM signature.

khm


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2020-09-21 17:51         ` ori
@ 2020-09-21 17:59           ` ori
  2020-09-21 18:27           ` Kurt H Maier
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: ori @ 2020-09-21 17:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: ori, 9front


> 
> OpenBSD mailing lists forward without munging.

On closer inspection, they also strip DKIM headers.



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2020-09-21 17:40       ` Stanley Lieber
  2020-09-21 17:51         ` ori
  2020-09-21 17:58         ` hiro
@ 2020-09-21 17:59         ` Lyndon Nerenberg
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Lyndon Nerenberg @ 2020-09-21 17:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

Stanley Lieber writes:

> how does every other mailing list in the world manage modifying the subjec=
> t line?

Poorly.  They rewrite the From: and MAIL FROM addresses to match
the mailing list exploder address, thus completely destroying the
functionality of the From: header.

DMARC is a cluster fuck that must be made to die.  Just don't do it.

--lyndon


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2020-09-21 17:40       ` Stanley Lieber
  2020-09-21 17:51         ` ori
@ 2020-09-21 17:58         ` hiro
  2020-09-21 18:42           ` Stanley Lieber
  2020-09-21 17:59         ` Lyndon Nerenberg
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: hiro @ 2020-09-21 17:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

option 1 and 3 would cover that

On 9/21/20, Stanley Lieber <sl@stanleylieber.com> wrote:
> On September 21, 2020 1:36:11 PM EDT, ori@eigenstate.org wrote:
>>> this example has cleared up for me why gmail does such stupidity,
>>> sadly they were misleading and claimed the spam classification was
>>due
>>> to "similar to other spam".
>>>
>>> i can confirm that most of the incorrectly classified spam messages i
>>> get in gmail seem to have dmarc not set to none.
>>> i checked a few exemplary senders, one of which being a web forum
>>with
>>> quite a few messages every day.
>>>
>>> gmail itself also has it's dmarc set to none.
>>>
>>> so while gmail wants to force you to use dmarc (unverified, somebody
>>> claimed that on irc once) they don't seem to think anybody should
>>have
>>> to act upon it in any way ;)
>>
>>I'll pile on and summarize the discussion from cat-v
>>earlier today:
>>
>>Kvik's email was being shitcanned on gmail because
>>of his dkim conflicting with our munging. Dkim signs
>>headers that it expects anyone forwarding mail to
>>leave untouched. Kvik's list was excessive, but most
>>dkim configs will be unhappy with our rewrites, since
>>they want the subject left untouched.
>>
>>That leaves us 3 options:
>>
>>	1. Strip out DKIM entirely from forwarded emails.
>>	2. Don't mess with any headers we don't need to
>>	3. Implement DKIM, munge to our heart's content,
>>	   and re-sign.
>>
>>My vote is in favor of 2 right now, and maybe 3 if we
>>ever implement dkim in upas.
>>
>>This seems like a good summary of the situation.
>>
>>	https://begriffs.com/posts/2018-09-18-dmarc-mailing-list.html
>>
>>For reference, the headers gmail doesn't want us to touch are:
>>
>>	mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
>>
>>Not sure what the other big providers want.
>
> how does every other mailing list in the world manage modifying the subject
> line?
>
> sl
>


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2020-09-21 17:40       ` Stanley Lieber
@ 2020-09-21 17:51         ` ori
  2020-09-21 17:59           ` ori
  2020-09-21 18:27           ` Kurt H Maier
  2020-09-21 17:58         ` hiro
  2020-09-21 17:59         ` Lyndon Nerenberg
  2 siblings, 2 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: ori @ 2020-09-21 17:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

>>
>>That leaves us 3 options:
>>
>>	1. Strip out DKIM entirely from forwarded emails.
>>	2. Don't mess with any headers we don't need to
>>	3. Implement DKIM, munge to our heart's content,
>>	   and re-sign.
>>
> 
> how does every other mailing list in the world manage modifying the subject line?
> 
> sl

 From a non-comprehensive survey (some google groups,
9fans): Option 3: they rewrite stuff and sign it again
with their own key.

OpenBSD mailing lists forward without munging.



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2020-09-21 17:36     ` ori
@ 2020-09-21 17:40       ` Stanley Lieber
  2020-09-21 17:51         ` ori
                           ` (2 more replies)
  0 siblings, 3 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Stanley Lieber @ 2020-09-21 17:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

On September 21, 2020 1:36:11 PM EDT, ori@eigenstate.org wrote:
>> this example has cleared up for me why gmail does such stupidity,
>> sadly they were misleading and claimed the spam classification was
>due
>> to "similar to other spam".
>> 
>> i can confirm that most of the incorrectly classified spam messages i
>> get in gmail seem to have dmarc not set to none.
>> i checked a few exemplary senders, one of which being a web forum
>with
>> quite a few messages every day.
>> 
>> gmail itself also has it's dmarc set to none.
>> 
>> so while gmail wants to force you to use dmarc (unverified, somebody
>> claimed that on irc once) they don't seem to think anybody should
>have
>> to act upon it in any way ;)
>
>I'll pile on and summarize the discussion from cat-v
>earlier today:
>
>Kvik's email was being shitcanned on gmail because
>of his dkim conflicting with our munging. Dkim signs
>headers that it expects anyone forwarding mail to
>leave untouched. Kvik's list was excessive, but most
>dkim configs will be unhappy with our rewrites, since
>they want the subject left untouched.
>
>That leaves us 3 options:
>
>	1. Strip out DKIM entirely from forwarded emails.
>	2. Don't mess with any headers we don't need to
>	3. Implement DKIM, munge to our heart's content,
>	   and re-sign.
>
>My vote is in favor of 2 right now, and maybe 3 if we
>ever implement dkim in upas.
>
>This seems like a good summary of the situation.
>
>	https://begriffs.com/posts/2018-09-18-dmarc-mailing-list.html
>
>For reference, the headers gmail doesn't want us to touch are:
>
>	mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
>
>Not sure what the other big providers want.

how does every other mailing list in the world manage modifying the subject line?

sl


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2020-09-21 17:16   ` hiro
@ 2020-09-21 17:36     ` ori
  2020-09-21 17:40       ` Stanley Lieber
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: ori @ 2020-09-21 17:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 23hiro, 9front

> this example has cleared up for me why gmail does such stupidity,
> sadly they were misleading and claimed the spam classification was due
> to "similar to other spam".
> 
> i can confirm that most of the incorrectly classified spam messages i
> get in gmail seem to have dmarc not set to none.
> i checked a few exemplary senders, one of which being a web forum with
> quite a few messages every day.
> 
> gmail itself also has it's dmarc set to none.
> 
> so while gmail wants to force you to use dmarc (unverified, somebody
> claimed that on irc once) they don't seem to think anybody should have
> to act upon it in any way ;)

I'll pile on and summarize the discussion from cat-v
earlier today:

Kvik's email was being shitcanned on gmail because
of his dkim conflicting with our munging. Dkim signs
headers that it expects anyone forwarding mail to
leave untouched. Kvik's list was excessive, but most
dkim configs will be unhappy with our rewrites, since
they want the subject left untouched.

That leaves us 3 options:

	1. Strip out DKIM entirely from forwarded emails.
	2. Don't mess with any headers we don't need to
	3. Implement DKIM, munge to our heart's content,
	   and re-sign.

My vote is in favor of 2 right now, and maybe 3 if we
ever implement dkim in upas.

This seems like a good summary of the situation.

	https://begriffs.com/posts/2018-09-18-dmarc-mailing-list.html

For reference, the headers gmail doesn't want us to touch are:

	mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to;

Not sure what the other big providers want.



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2020-09-21 17:12 ` [9front] test Stanley Lieber
@ 2020-09-21 17:16   ` hiro
  2020-09-21 17:36     ` ori
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: hiro @ 2020-09-21 17:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

this example has cleared up for me why gmail does such stupidity,
sadly they were misleading and claimed the spam classification was due
to "similar to other spam".

i can confirm that most of the incorrectly classified spam messages i
get in gmail seem to have dmarc not set to none.
i checked a few exemplary senders, one of which being a web forum with
quite a few messages every day.

gmail itself also has it's dmarc set to none.

so while gmail wants to force you to use dmarc (unverified, somebody
claimed that on irc once) they don't seem to think anybody should have
to act upon it in any way ;)


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2020-09-21 15:40 test kvik
@ 2020-09-21 17:12 ` Stanley Lieber
  2020-09-21 17:16   ` hiro
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: Stanley Lieber @ 2020-09-21 17:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

On September 21, 2020 11:40:20 AM EDT, kvik@a-b.xyz wrote:
>I've changed DMARC policy to 'none'.
>
>Let's see if this mail still gets to spam.
>
>P.S. Sorry for spamming the list.

message received.

sl


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2019-05-18 14:28 ` [9front] test Stanley Lieber
@ 2019-05-20 13:47   ` Calvin Morrison
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Calvin Morrison @ 2019-05-20 13:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

test

On Sat, 18 May 2019 at 10:29, Stanley Lieber <sl@stanleylieber.com> wrote:
>
> test
>


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2019-05-18 11:08 test cinap_lenrek
@ 2019-05-18 14:28 ` Stanley Lieber
  2019-05-20 13:47   ` Calvin Morrison
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: Stanley Lieber @ 2019-05-18 14:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9Front

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 17 bytes --]

     test 

     

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 45 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2018-10-11  6:35 test Ethan Gardener
@ 2018-10-11 13:30 ` Stanley Lieber
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Stanley Lieber @ 2018-10-11 13:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

yeah

sl



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
@ 2017-03-18 21:04 sl
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: sl @ 2017-03-18 21:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

worked.

sl


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] TEST
  2017-01-29 23:29 ` [9front] TEST cinap_lenrek
@ 2017-01-29 23:34   ` Stanley Lieber
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Stanley Lieber @ 2017-01-29 23:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

> On Jan 29, 2017, at 6:29 PM, cinap_lenrek@felloff.net wrote:
> 
> very good, can we go to warp?

Is that an order.

Sir.

sl



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] TEST
  2017-01-29 23:26 TEST sl
@ 2017-01-29 23:29 ` cinap_lenrek
  2017-01-29 23:34   ` Stanley Lieber
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: cinap_lenrek @ 2017-01-29 23:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

very good, can we go to warp?

--
cinap


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2016-05-03 23:48 test sl
@ 2016-05-03 23:55 ` cinap_lenrek
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: cinap_lenrek @ 2016-05-03 23:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

works

--
cinap


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2016-01-10  7:09 test cinap_lenrek
@ 2016-01-10  7:42 ` mischief
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: mischief @ 2016-01-10  7:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front, cinap_lenrek

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 104 bytes --]

Test worked.

On January 9, 2016 11:09:50 PM PST, cinap_lenrek@felloff.net wrote:
>testing
>
>--
>cinap

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 364 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test.
  2016-01-04 23:14 test cinap_lenrek
@ 2016-01-04 23:18 ` Nick Owens
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Nick Owens @ 2016-01-04 23:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

test worked

On 01/04/2016 03:14 PM, cinap_lenrek@felloff.net wrote:
> test.
> 
> --
> cinap
> 


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2015-11-18  2:34 test sl
@ 2015-11-18  5:01 ` ian kremlin
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: ian kremlin @ 2015-11-18  5:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

testo besto, here you go-go

On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 9:34 PM,  <sl@stanleylieber.com> wrote:
> This message is yet ANOTHER test.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] TEST
  2015-10-09 17:41 [9front] TEST sl
@ 2015-10-09 18:01 ` hiro
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: hiro @ 2015-10-09 18:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

Then I trust you, too!


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] TEST
@ 2015-10-09 17:41 sl
  2015-10-09 18:01 ` hiro
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: sl @ 2015-10-09 17:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

> google warns me that you would steal my identity
> "Be careful with this message. Similar messages were used to steal
> people's personal information. Unless you trust the sender, don't
> click links or reply with personal information. Learn More"

I trust Google.

sl


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] TEST
  2015-10-09  2:42 TEST sl
  2015-10-09  2:44 ` [9front] TEST Nick Owens
  2015-10-09  3:12 ` cinap_lenrek
@ 2015-10-09  9:04 ` hiro
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: hiro @ 2015-10-09  9:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

google warns me that you would steal my identity
"Be careful with this message. Similar messages were used to steal
people's personal information. Unless you trust the sender, don't
click links or reply with personal information. Learn More"

On 10/9/15, sl@stanleylieber.com <sl@stanleylieber.com> wrote:
> TEST
>


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] TEST
  2015-10-09  2:42 TEST sl
  2015-10-09  2:44 ` [9front] TEST Nick Owens
@ 2015-10-09  3:12 ` cinap_lenrek
  2015-10-09  9:04 ` hiro
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: cinap_lenrek @ 2015-10-09  3:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

works.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] TEST
  2015-10-09  2:42 TEST sl
@ 2015-10-09  2:44 ` Nick Owens
  2015-10-09  3:12 ` cinap_lenrek
  2015-10-09  9:04 ` hiro
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Nick Owens @ 2015-10-09  2:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

IT WORKED

On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 7:42 PM,  <sl@stanleylieber.com> wrote:
> TEST


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2015-08-08  9:41 test cinap_lenrek
@ 2015-08-08  9:50 ` BurnZeZ
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: BurnZeZ @ 2015-08-08  9:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

> test

Test reply


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2015-01-31 19:47 test sl
@ 2015-01-31 19:48 ` cinap_lenrek
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: cinap_lenrek @ 2015-01-31 19:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

works.

--
cinap


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test.
  2014-06-13  8:28 test cinap_lenrek
@ 2014-06-13 10:30 ` Aram Hăvărneanu
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Aram Hăvărneanu @ 2014-06-13 10:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

error: test failed, engaging automatic nuclear strike.

-- 
Aram Hăvărneanu


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2013-12-05 13:16   ` suharik
  2013-12-05 13:21     ` sl
@ 2013-12-05 16:31     ` Kurt H Maier
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Kurt H Maier @ 2013-12-05 16:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

Quoting suharik <gleb.ax.sh@gmail.com>:

> No web archive yet?
>


It's available over 9p, I think.

khm



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2013-12-05 13:16   ` suharik
@ 2013-12-05 13:21     ` sl
  2013-12-05 16:31     ` Kurt H Maier
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: sl @ 2013-12-05 13:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

> No web archive yet?

No.

sl


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2013-11-11  1:40 ` [9front] test BurnZeZ
@ 2013-12-05 13:16   ` suharik
  2013-12-05 13:21     ` sl
  2013-12-05 16:31     ` Kurt H Maier
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: suharik @ 2013-12-05 13:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 83 bytes --]

No web archive yet?



2013/11/11 BurnZeZ <brz-systemd-dev@intma.in>

> MORE TESTS

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 389 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2013-11-11  1:35 test cinap_lenrek
@ 2013-11-11  1:40 ` BurnZeZ
  2013-12-05 13:16   ` suharik
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: BurnZeZ @ 2013-11-11  1:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 10 bytes --]

MORE TESTS

[-- Attachment #2: Type: image/jpeg, Size: 33140 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] test
  2013-09-08  2:42 test sl
@ 2013-09-09  5:46 ` sl
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: sl @ 2013-09-09  5:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

> test.

Another copy got sent when I sent my previous reply.

I found some fun garbage in the mailing list queue. Two
addresses (one lavabit) failing every time the mailing
list attempted to send a message to them. We saw this
before, the last time duplicate messages were being
sent. Connection to the target server would fail for
whatever reason, then the mailing list would just
start over and attempt to send the message again,
to the entire list. Rinse and repeat, forever.

I've removed the offending addresses and cleaned
out the queue (again).

sl


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2021-09-06  1:26 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 45+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-08-21 22:29 [9front] test cinap_lenrek
2021-08-21 23:49 ` Stuart Morrow
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2021-09-06  1:02 sl
2021-08-25  8:41 cinap_lenrek
2021-08-25  9:11 ` Pavel Renev
2021-08-25 14:41   ` kvik
2021-08-25 14:46     ` ori
2021-08-25 14:56       ` Stanley Lieber
2020-09-21 15:40 test kvik
2020-09-21 17:12 ` [9front] test Stanley Lieber
2020-09-21 17:16   ` hiro
2020-09-21 17:36     ` ori
2020-09-21 17:40       ` Stanley Lieber
2020-09-21 17:51         ` ori
2020-09-21 17:59           ` ori
2020-09-21 18:27           ` Kurt H Maier
2020-09-21 17:58         ` hiro
2020-09-21 18:42           ` Stanley Lieber
2020-09-21 21:40             ` hiro
2020-09-21 22:20               ` hiro
2020-09-22 12:57             ` Ethan Gardener
2020-09-22 13:12               ` hiro
2020-09-21 17:59         ` Lyndon Nerenberg
2019-05-18 11:08 test cinap_lenrek
2019-05-18 14:28 ` [9front] test Stanley Lieber
2019-05-20 13:47   ` Calvin Morrison
2018-10-11  6:35 test Ethan Gardener
2018-10-11 13:30 ` [9front] test Stanley Lieber
2017-03-18 21:04 sl
2017-01-29 23:26 TEST sl
2017-01-29 23:29 ` [9front] TEST cinap_lenrek
2017-01-29 23:34   ` Stanley Lieber
2016-05-03 23:48 test sl
2016-05-03 23:55 ` [9front] test cinap_lenrek
2016-01-10  7:09 test cinap_lenrek
2016-01-10  7:42 ` [9front] test mischief
2016-01-04 23:14 test cinap_lenrek
2016-01-04 23:18 ` [9front] test Nick Owens
2015-11-18  2:34 test sl
2015-11-18  5:01 ` [9front] test ian kremlin
2015-10-09 17:41 [9front] TEST sl
2015-10-09 18:01 ` hiro
2015-10-09  2:42 TEST sl
2015-10-09  2:44 ` [9front] TEST Nick Owens
2015-10-09  3:12 ` cinap_lenrek
2015-10-09  9:04 ` hiro
2015-08-08  9:41 test cinap_lenrek
2015-08-08  9:50 ` [9front] test BurnZeZ
2015-01-31 19:47 test sl
2015-01-31 19:48 ` [9front] test cinap_lenrek
2014-06-13  8:28 test cinap_lenrek
2014-06-13 10:30 ` [9front] test Aram Hăvărneanu
2013-11-11  1:35 test cinap_lenrek
2013-11-11  1:40 ` [9front] test BurnZeZ
2013-12-05 13:16   ` suharik
2013-12-05 13:21     ` sl
2013-12-05 16:31     ` Kurt H Maier
2013-09-08  2:42 test sl
2013-09-09  5:46 ` [9front] test sl

9front - general discussion about 9front

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror https://inbox.vuxu.org/9front

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V1 9front 9front/ https://inbox.vuxu.org/9front \
		9front@9front.org
	public-inbox-index 9front

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.vuxu.org/vuxu.archive.9front


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git