[Mailman-Users] Subject_prefix doesn't get added for posts from onedomain

[Chris Malatesta]

Yes, these are posts from the list, actually they are any post to any list
from people at this company... I don't understand how this could happen
either, but the only thing I can think is different between one of their
posts and all others is the header...

On 2/5/05 12:47 PM, "Mark Sapiro" <msapiro at value.net> wrote:

> Chris Malatesta wrote:
>> 
>> I have setup a new mailman server for a client (RHE3/netmail 1.0.5/Mailman
>> 2.1.5) when people from one domain running qmail post to a newly created
>> list with the default options, the subject_prefix doesn¹t get added to the
>> subject line, but it does for everyone else???
> 
> I assume you're sure you're seeing a message from the list and not a
> direct Cc:
> 
>> The only thing I can think could be different is the header of the email,
>> There are some differences with mail from this domain, which I don¹t believe
>> should be this way, but not sure if this is what causes the problem..
> 
> I can't see how this would affect prefixing as long as the message
> processing is otherwise normal.
> 
>> Any ideas would be appreciated.
>> 
>> Chris
>> 
>> 
>> I.e. Here is a header from this domain, with the actual address names and
>> ip's changed.
>> 
>> Received: from domain.com ([55.255.255.255]) by otherdomain.com with
>> Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211);
>>     Wed, 2 Feb 2005 17:30:07 -0800
>> Received: (qmail 508 invoked by uid 14282); 3 Feb 2005 01:33:53 -0000
>> Received: from user at domain.com by domain.com by uid 505 with
>> qmail-scanner-1.22
>> (avp: 5.0.2.0. f-prot: 3.12/.  Clear:RC:1(10.250.100.83):.
>> Processed in 0.557572 secs); 03 Feb 2005 01:33:53 -0000
>> Received: from in.domain.com (HELO usersname) (10.250.100.83)
>>                                        ^^
> 
> This is how the user's MUA or webmail or whatever identified itself. It
> should not be significant as long as the receiver accepted the mail.
> 
>>  by 0 with SMTP; 3 Feb 2005 01:33:53 -0000
>> Reply-To: <user at domain.com>
>> From: "First Last" <user at domain.com>
>> To: "'First Last'" <sender at domain.com>
>> Subject: Same Problem
>> Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 17:34:44 -0800
>> Organization: Company Name
>> 
>>>> AND THE ID HAS THE USERS NAME HERE INSTEAD OF THE DOMAIN NAME
>> Message-ID: <012b01c50990$8cf42bc0$a764fa0a at usersname>
>>>>                                              ^^^
> 
> This is not a problem either. This is generated by the user's MUA and
> is not required to be a domain name. Look at the Message-ID: in this
> mail from me. It will be of the form
> <PC17302005020512231506405ab4b0af at msapiro> with differences just left
> of the @. The "msapiro" to the right of the @ looks like a user name
> (actually it's a machine name), and it's never been a problem.
> 
>> 
>> MIME-Version: 1.0
>> Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
>>    boundary="----=_NextPart_000_012C_01C5094D.7ED0EBC0"
>> X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
>> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627
>> Importance: Normal
>> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
>> X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.500000, version=0.17.5
>> Return-Path: user at domain.com
>> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Feb 2005 01:30:08.0062 (UTC)
>> FILETIME=[E53905E0:01C5098F]
> 
> --
> Mark Sapiro <msapiro at value.net>       The highway is for gamblers,
> San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan
>