Ed, 

What do you make of this ezmlm error:

<announce@openoffice.org>:
ezmlm-store: fatal: message already has a Mailing-List header (maybe I should 
be a sublist) (#5.7.2)

Bill's message went out just fine to the announce list...

Sent email to edk for secondary technical support

accepting issue

If you look at the headers carefully, you'll see that the message was delivered
-- with the Mailing-List header -- by openoffice.org to an address which appears
to be "pbl@ideos.com".  After that -- for some reason which is incomprehensible
to me -- it was sent back to the mailing list with an invalid envelope sender
(that's the only explanation which I can find for the bounce to sender).  The
MTA to blame for this might be (Lotus Domino Release 5.0.4a).

Fortunately, ezmlm protects against mail loops, and it rejects the message. 
There's no way for ezmlm to know that the envelope sender provided is bogus (you
can see at the top of the message, the Return-Path, which is generated from it)
-- so the best it can do is to bounce the message as it did.

This doesn't interfere with the operation of the list; but it might be
worthwhile to ask this recipient to fix his/her broken MTA, or unsubscribe.  So
far as I can see, that's not a technical issue ...

If you have any questions, please ask and I'll try to answer them.

I understand.

user pbl@ideos.com unsubscrited from announce list.

I'll send him a message as to why.

detailed diagnosis of what happend:

Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 00:40:36 -0800
From: Ed Korthof <edk@collab.net>
To: Adam Gould <goolie@collab.net>
Cc: "openoffice-admin@collab.net" <openoffice-admin@collab.net>
Subject: Re: OOo - error messages from ezmlm

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 12:22:36AM -0800, Adam Gould wrote:
> Ed,
> 
> I tried posting an email announceing the new OOo build to the announce
> list.  I got back this error (see below, first message).  Thinking that it
> haddn't gone though, I tried posting it again, and again got back the
> error message.  
> 
> Too late, i realized that both had gone though.
> 
> Perhaps you can tell me why ezmlm got upset to begin with?  I tried
> reading the headers, but couldn't figgure it out.

This is the same problem as one to which I already responded --
pbl@ideos.com has a seriously broken MTA (Lotus Domino Release 5.0.4a).
See http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=306

I don't mind diagnosing such problems, but since solving it should be
easy for you, I simply identified the problem and figured that you'd
take care of unsubscribing the user.  I can do so -- in the case of OOo,
since I happen to have an admin acct in that instanciation -- but
generally speaking I don't expect to have such an acct, and I'd rather
leave this in the hands of the people who are handling the
instanciation.

Here is a detailed explanation, which covers information which I didn't
describe in my comment to the IZ entry.  Feel free to add this to that
IZ entry.  The response required is removing this user from the mailing
list, using the admin UI.  Remember that new headers are added at the
top:

> Hi. This is the qmail-send program at openoffice.org.
> I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
> This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
> 
> <announce@openoffice.org>:
>

FYI : this message tends to come up when a subscriber to a mailing list
has a sufficiently broken MTA, and the MTA attempts to send messages
back to the list for one reason or another.  ezmlm uses the Mailing-List
header to avoid mail loops in that situation -- if it didn't, a message
would go to the list, it'd go to the bad address, then back to the list
and out again, then to the bad address, ad infinum.

> --- Below this line is a copy of the message.
> 
> Return-Path: <goolie@collab.net>
> Received: (qmail 16224 invoked from network); 26 Jan 2001 02:12:01 -0000
> Received: from emu.prod.itd.earthlink.net (207.217.121.31)
>   by h12.sny.collab.net with SMTP; 26 Jan 2001 02:12:01 -0000

h12.sny.collab.net (==openoffice.org) got this message from
emu.prod.itd.earthlink.net -- that could theoretically have been you,
goolie.

> Received: from server.ideos.com (1Cust134.tnt1.rockingham.nc.da.uu.net 
[63.16.96.134])
>       by emu.prod.itd.earthlink.net (8.9.3-EL_1_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id 
SAA25050
>       for <announce@openoffice.org>; Thu, 25 Jan 2001 18:11:59 -0800 (PST)

emu.prod.itd.earthlink.net got this message from server.ideos.com -- I'm
guessing that wasn't you.  If it wasn't you, then I know something is
wrong -- the message should go from you, straight to OOo, then out to
the mailing list subscribers.  If it goes through other hosts, perhaps
someone tried to send it back to openoffice.org?  If so, and
openoffice.org did the right thing by rejecting it.

> Received: from server ([10.10.10.1])
>           by server.ideos.com (Lotus Domino Release 5.0.4a)
>           with SMTP id 2001012521201304:143 ;
>           Thu, 25 Jan 2001 21:20:13 -0500 

This looks like transmission w/in a private network -- 10.*.*.* is never
used for public addresses.  Anyway, it's mostly interesting 'cause it
says Lotus Domino Release 5.0.4a -- and I'm of the opinion that that's
probably the broken MTA.  This is more evidence that someone else was
involved ...

> Delivered-To: laurentp-ideos:com-pbl@ideos.com
> X-Envelope-To: pbl@ideos.com

These two are key.  pbl@ideos.com couldn't have come from your message,
except through the list of subscribers.  By the time I reach this point,
I'm firmly convinced that this address did something bogus -- otherwise,
there's no way I can see for it to have gotten into the headers.  It
also explains the hosts shown above.

> Received: (qmail 10311 invoked from network); 26 Jan 2001 02:05:39 -0000
> Received: from h12.sny.collab.net (HELO openoffice.org) (64.208.42.22)
>   by agho.pair.com with SMTP; 26 Jan 2001 02:05:39 -0000
[snip]

This confirms matters -- openoffice.org already saw this message, and
sent it out to the list.  So the thing we saw at the top of the message
-- where ezmlm rejected the message -- was the right thing to do, 'cause
it had already been sent to the mailing list.  Someone screwed up and
sent it back -- worse, they sent it back with a totally bogus return
path.  The MTA to blame is so hopelessly broken I don't know where to
start.


Reading headers like this is confusing because the headers go backwards
in time as you read downwards.

thanks --

Ed
-- 
   +=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=
   |   Ed Korthof   |  edk@collab.net  |   650-228-2527   |
   +=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=

As mentioned on the qa dev list on March 5th I will close all resolved
<wontfix/duplicate/worksforme/invalid> issues. Please see this posting for
details. First step in IssueZilla is unfortunately to set them to verified.

As mentioned on the qa dev list on March 5th I will close all resolved
<wontfix/duplicate/worksforme/invalid> issues. Please see this posting for details.