[COFF] Status of classiccmp.org?

[COFF] Status of classiccmp.org?

[Warren Toomey via COFF]

All, does anybody know the status of classiccmp.org? It's been down for a
few days and I'm already missing the cctalk list.

If it's a issue of hosting, and someone has Jay West's e-mail address,
then I could host the list on minnie. I've just done the mailman3
upgrade with mailman2 running concurrently to provide old-school list
archives. I'd be happy to give Jay access to the system.

Cheers, Warren

[COFF] Re: Status of classiccmp.org?

[Jason T]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 648 bytes --]

On Tue, Jun 14, 2022, 17:17 Warren Toomey via COFF <coff@tuhs.org> wrote:

> All, does anybody know the status of classiccmp.org? It's been down for a
> few days and I'm already missing the cctalk list.
>
> If it's a issue of hosting, and someone has Jay West's e-mail address,
> then I could host the list on minnie. I've just done the mailman3
> upgrade with mailman2 running concurrently to provide old-school list
> archives. I'd be happy to give Jay access to the system.
>

The server is offline. I believe Jay is on the road this week and doesn't
have remote access.

Migration is planned for "soon" but this was not a planned outage.

J

>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1353 bytes --]

[COFF] Re: Status of classiccmp.org?

[Tomasz Rola]

On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 05:27:01PM -0500, Jason T wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2022, 17:17 Warren Toomey via COFF <coff@tuhs.org> wrote:
> 
> > All, does anybody know the status of classiccmp.org? It's been down for a
> > few days and I'm already missing the cctalk list.
> >
[...]
> 
> The server is offline. I believe Jay is on the road this week and doesn't
> have remote access.
> 
> Migration is planned for "soon" but this was not a planned outage.

Ah. I too am missing a "noise" coming from that direction. A noise,
well, a buzz, of bees always repairing their hardware, nothing negative.

-- 
Regards,
Tomasz Rola

--
** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature.      **
** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home    **
** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened...      **
**                                                                 **
** Tomasz Rola          mailto:tomasz_rola@bigfoot.com             **

[COFF] Re: Status of classiccmp.org?

[Grant Taylor via COFF]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 463 bytes --]

On 6/14/22 11:14 PM, Tomasz Rola wrote:
> Ah. I too am missing a "noise" coming from that direction. A noise, 
> well, a buzz, of bees always repairing their hardware, nothing 
> negative.

I think that it will be interesting to see how much email makes it 
through once services are brought back on line.

I've always retained mail for two weeks before giving up.  Not as may 
people do so for as long any more.



-- 
Grant. . . .
unix || die


[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 4017 bytes --]

[COFF] Re: Status of classiccmp.org?

[Tomasz Rola]

On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 09:37:46AM -0600, Grant Taylor via COFF wrote:
> On 6/14/22 11:14 PM, Tomasz Rola wrote:
> >Ah. I too am missing a "noise" coming from that direction. A
> >noise, well, a buzz, of bees always repairing their hardware,
> >nothing negative.
> 
> I think that it will be interesting to see how much email makes it
> through once services are brought back on line.
> 
> I've always retained mail for two weeks before giving up.  Not as
> may people do so for as long any more.

As you might know, when the target does not receive email, sender will
try to send it to backup receiver(s), here:

 $ dig classiccmp.org MX

; <<>> DiG 9.16.27-Debian <<>> classiccmp.org MX
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 27228
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 2, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1

;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 512
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;classiccmp.org.                        IN      MX

;; ANSWER SECTION:
classiccmp.org.         1799    IN      MX      10 mx2.ezwind.net.
classiccmp.org.         1799    IN      MX      10 mx1.ezwind.net.

[...]

and from this:

[

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MX_record

]

I infer that the actual date when email will get dumped to /dev/null
depends on settings of relevant mail servers (MTAs) - either sending one
or backup receiver. If there is a way to get those value remotely by
talking to the server, I have not yet dug it up, nor looked.

I assume it might be about two weeks in case of classiccmp and each
email author should be notified when his email fails to reach a
recipient. So, we will see (experiment by doing nothing...),

-- 
Regards,
Tomasz Rola

--
** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature.      **
** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home    **
** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened...      **
**                                                                 **
** Tomasz Rola          mailto:tomasz_rola@bigfoot.com             **

[COFF] Re: Status of classiccmp.org?

[Grant Taylor via COFF]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1751 bytes --]

On 6/20/22 9:59 PM, Tomasz Rola wrote:
> As you might know, when the target does not receive email, sender 
> will try to send it to backup receiver(s), here:

That's the idea.  At least in an ideal world.  Sadly, I've experienced 
too many ... less than ideal installations.

> ;; ANSWER SECTION:
> classiccmp.org.         1799    IN      MX      10 mx2.ezwind.net.
> classiccmp.org.         1799    IN      MX      10 mx1.ezwind.net.

Those are actually two equal weight peer MXs.  There's nothing 
differentiating one as primary and backup.  The "10" would need to be 
different between the two records.

> I infer that the actual date when email will get dumped to /dev/null
> depends on settings of relevant mail servers (MTAs) - either sending one
> or backup receiver.

In an ideal world, messages would never be dumped to /dev/null.  Per RFC 
-- the bible of interoperability on the Internet -- messages should 
never be lost.  Instead, such ultimate undeliverables situations should 
be reported to the (purported) sender.

> If there is a way to get those value remotely by talking to the server, 
> I have not yet dug it up, nor looked.

I'm not aware of anything in the SMTP protocol that is applicable for 
getting such information.  Sometimes it can be inferred by observing 
behavior.

I did receive such a Delivery Status Notification (a.k.a. DSN) from 
mx1.ezwind.net five days after I sent a message to cctalk.

> I assume it might be about two weeks in case of classiccmp and each
> email author should be notified when his email fails to reach a
> recipient. So, we will see (experiment by doing nothing...),

Yep.  Hence "inferred by observing".  ;-)



-- 
Grant. . . .
unix || die


[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 4017 bytes --]

[COFF] Re: Status of classiccmp.org?

[Grant Taylor via COFF]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 367 bytes --]

On 6/14/22 4:16 PM, Warren Toomey via COFF wrote:
> All, does anybody know the status of classiccmp.org? It's been down for a
> few days and I'm already missing the cctalk list.

It seems as if classiccmp.org is now back online.

I received messages from the cctalk mailing list and checked and found 
it online again.



-- 
Grant. . . .
unix || die


[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 4017 bytes --]