The mailing list for listmasters using Sympa

[Olivier Salaun - CRU <address@concealed>]

Hi Andreas,

We were never reported misinterpretation problems of the 'send' parameter.
First of all you must be aware that 'send closed' refers to a scenario 
(access control set of rules, in Sympa vocabulary) that might be 
redefined by the listmaster. Did you define your own send.closed scenario ?

I can think of other circumstancies where this could happen :
  
   1/ list 'config' file is incorrect due to migration script (from 
Mailman) problems
   => you can easily check this, simulating a Mailman2Sympa list migration

   2/ Mails got some "special" header fields that made Sympa think they 
had been approved   
   => check distributed messages looking for X-Sender headers for example.

If the list was not setup to maintain web archives of messages, there 
might be text archives though ; check the 'archives/' subdirectory in 
the list's directory (under expl/).

I hope this will help you prevent this kind of disasters.

Andreas de Pretis wrote:

> y situations where sympa 'forgets' that one ore more
> lists has 'send closed' defined? I have had the following situation:
>
> +) migration from Mailman to Sympa of about
>   100 Lists
>
> +) double-checked all migrated list-configurations (without problems)
>
> +) list x had 'send closed'
>
> +) some mails got through list x (not send by listmaster,
>   moderator or owner)
>
> +) these mails got delivered to about 3000 recipients
>
> +) some replied and complained about these mails ...  and soon we
> have
>   had thousands of mails passing through sympa ...
>
> +) ALL of these mails (which got delivered although they shouldn't -
>   as defined via 'send closed') were NOT archived too! (there is
> NOTHING
>   left by sympa that could proove the delivery of these mails,
> except
>   the sympa logfile of course) ... all other (allowed) mails got
>   archived well
>
> +) after some despairing actions to close the list (setting it
>   from closed to closed - because it WAS configured as closed)
>   it finally worked and all new mails got rejected (we now have 
>   about revisions and the actual configuration all showing the
>   same values for 'send')
>
> It seems sympa didn't care a bit about this setting ;-( (under which
> circumstances soever) ... does anybody have similar experiences with
> sympa regarding this problem(s) and could give me a hint?
>
>  

--
Olivier Salaun
Comite Reseau des Universites