[Mailman-Users] Mailman and Gmane ?

Mark Sapiro mark at msapiro.net
Fri Jan 22 04:45:55 CET 2010

John Fitzsimons wrote:

>On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 17:18:10 -0800, Mark Sapiro wrote:
>>This is all irrelevant. Since the posts from Gmane are arriving via the
>>NNTP gateway, no membership tests whatsoever are applied to the post -
>>no list member, no moderation, no *_these_nonmembers.

Actually, that is NOT the case, at least for the message in your
follow-up post. See my reply to that (when it comes).

>Okay, so to "authenticate" a small number of people eg. dozens what
>should I have ? 
>(1) The Gmane subscription ? 
>(2) The gateway ? 
>(3) Both ?

I think the best thing for you to have is the Gmane subscription only.

>Just tell me what you think is best. You are the expert here. Not me.
>I am the dummy.
>I very much appreciate your help. At the end of the day however I want
>to impliment a system that actually "works" !
>>>There are so many headers I am totally confused as to which ones
>>>can/should be filtered on and which ones shouldn't be.
>>You can use header_filter_rules to hold a post from the news gateway.
>>You can filter on any header you want, but this won't work well unless
>>you have fery few authorized posters.
>Well, is there a practical limit to the term "very few" ? Initially I
>hope to increase subscribers to dozens. The number could however 
>reach something like a hundred. Would that "break" Mailman ? What
>dictates how many are "too many" ?

Too many is more than you are willing to maintain in header filter
rules. Mailman doesn't care, but we apparently don't need to do this.
See my next reply.

>< snip >
>>>As I am an "authorised" poster the sort of filter that would be needed
>>>that comes to mind would be something like...
>>>DELETE  & ! From: {me at mydomain | member at hisdomain}
>>>But I have no idea how that would need to be implimented in Mailman.
>>Like the following in Privacy options... -> Spam filters ->
>>First rule:
>>  regexp: ^from:.*[ >]me at mydomain([> ]|$)
>>  action: Accept
>>(either additional rules or additional regexps in the First rule for
>>additional posters)
>Ah ! I like that. Do I insert the above EXACTLY as you have suggested
>regexp: ^from:.*[ >]me at mydomain([> ]|$)
>action: Accept
>I need both the "regexp" AND "action" items ?
>Also, at what approximate number would you recommend expanding the
>first filter rule in preference to adding new ones ? I am guessing
>that there may be some sort of a "limit" set as to how many characters
>in total can be in that box ?
>>Last rule
>>  regexp: ^X-Injected-Via-Gmane:
>>  action: Discard
>< snip >
>>They could post to Gmane via NNTP with Gmane sending to your list via
>Okay, so if I get rid of the gateway settings the above filters will
>still work ?

I will give you a recipe in the next reply, but the short answer is No.

>>>> If so, it's little help, because
>>>>the headers should be quite different from a mailed post.)
>>>Okay, see the added info I provided above.
>>Which contrary to your "Here are some of the headers as they appear
>>when they arrive at the mailing list." assertion appear to be the
>>headers from a post delivered from Mailman, not the headers of the
>>post as it arrived to Mailman.
>Good point. Sorry. If I could show you the raw header info then I
>>Note that Mailman has rewritten the Sender: and envelope sender
>>(reflected as Return-Path:) and added Errors-To: and maybe Reply-To:
>>>>If not, and Gmane *isn't* in one of From, Sender, or envelope sender,
>>>>then I don't understand how posts from unsubscribed addresses via
>>>>Gmane are getting through, since IIRC you said earlier you have
>>>>'generic_nonmember_action' set to 'Hold'.  Right?
>>>Sorry, your terminology has confused me here. What do you mean by
>>>'generic_nonmember_action' set to 'Hold'.  ?
>>He means the setting near the bottom of the list admin Privacy
>>options... -> Sender filters page.
>Ah ! Sorry. I am still very much a "newbie" here. I have 
>By default, should new list member postings be moderated?  set to "No"
>Action to take when a moderated member posts to the list.  set to
>I am not sure if I need to change either/both of those settings to
>make sure the filtering you recommend works.

See my next reply.

>>>I have setup the list as "Require approval". Is that what you mean ?
>>That is presumably Privacy options... -> Subscription rules ->
>>subscribe_policy - not the same thing at all.
>Okay, thanks. I will not change that then.

Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan

More information about the Mailman-Users mailing list