[Nottingham] RE: Pro Licenses and Mesh Networking

[Graeme Fowler]

At risk of extending a thread not entirely Linux related...

On Tue, 2007-10-02 at 18:41 +0100, Martin wrote:
> I would guess that you got some spam email with forged NLUG headers,
> that went nowhere near the lug.org servers.

Return-path: <nottingham-bounces at mailman.lug.org.uk>
Delivery-date: Mon, 01 Oct 2007 21:37:36 +0100
Received: from xinit.lug.org.uk ([217.147.93.68]) by boom.graemef.net
  with esmtps (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from
  <nottingham-bounces at mailman.lug.org.uk>) id 1IcS1D-0000Sw-Kn for
  graeme at graemef.net; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 21:37:36 +0100
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=xinit.lug.org.uk)
  by xinit.lug.org.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #2) id 1IcS19-0002s5-00 ;
  Mon, 01 Oct 2007 21:37:27 +0100
Received: from mail-in-01.lug.org.uk ([217.147.93.69]) by
  xinit.lug.org.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #2) id 1IcS17-0002pi-00 for
  nottingham at mailman.lug.org.uk; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 21:37:25 +0100
Received: from outmail129179.authsmtp.com ([62.13.129.179]) by
  mail-in-01.lug.org.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from
  <david.mitchell at vaxxis.com>) id 1IcS0l-0002Io-Us for
  nottingham at mailman.lug.org.uk; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 20:37:21 +0000
Received: from outmail128177.authsmtp.com (outmail128177.authsmtp.com
  [62.13.128.177]) by punt3.authsmtp.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/Kp) with ESMTP
  id l91KaqvH021195;  Mon, 1 Oct 2007 21:36:52 +0100 (BST)
Received: from VAXXIS1 (cpc3-basf5-0-0-cust103.nott.cable.ntl.com
  [86.1.168.104]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.authsmtp.com
  (8.13.8/8.13.8/Kp) with ESMTP id l91KapZN065122;
   Mon, 1 Oct 2007 21:36:51 +0100 (BST)
Message-ID: <!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAAAAAAAAXWBleDe
+RU6jSDRybKTUXcKAAAAQAAAA7whWCMjKv0+znB+/L5YTBwEAAAAA at vaxxis.com>


Definitely went via the lug.org.uk MX servers, then :)

The gist of the emails I swapped with both ends of the original last
night were that a gonad had been dropped by the sender allowing Outlook
to autocomplete a recipient without checking. Really.

No sting, lots of apologies, some embarrassment.

Something makes me wonder whether vaxxis.com was (or is) on a DNSBL
somewhere, which is why so many people didn't get the original. It would
be interesting to get the lug.org.uk postmaster to extract the logs for
that message, since it clearly got rejected by several subscribers'
systems.

Graeme