Missing forwarded held mail

[elind]

Not a big deal but it's the first I've noticed. I had an item in held mail that I wanted to look at, so I forwarded without whitelisting intending to report manually, but it never appeared in my mail. Any idea what happened or what I might have done by mistake?

[StevenUnderwood]

Not a big deal but it's the first I've noticed. I had an item in held mail that I wanted to look at, so I forwarded without whitelisting intending to report manually, but it never appeared in my mail. Any idea what happened or what I might have done by mistake?

While not a common occurance, you are not the first person to report this issue. If you could provide JT (SpamCop email administrator) details about when this occurred, he might be able to determine what happened.

[elind]

The message was titled

From: "Logistica" <plkoijhu[at]gmail.com>

Subject: Conoce los efectos del CETU en caso de aprobarse?

It was this morning sometime and would have been report as message # 4157? if reported.

I suppose I might have selected DELETE by mistake, but I had a pretty clear mental image that I didn't.

No harm done, but I was curious.

[elind]

While not a common occurance, you are not the first person to report this issue. If you could provide JT (SpamCop email administrator) details about when this occurred, he might be able to determine what happened.

Happened again. Same thing and this time I am POSITIVE I selected Forward do not whitelist, as opposed to Delete.

Just after 8:30 EST. 7/18/07

I have recently used Forward and Whitelist without problems. However the DNSorbs (or whatever it's called) list seems to have started holding some mail that was previously OK or whitelisted. A couple of weeks ago I was using the PC and spamcop via a different ISP. Could that have any relevance?

[elind]

The above list should be list.dsbl.org.

I haven't had any trouble with this in the past. Now suddenly it is holding some mail. Today I received two emails from an organization about a renewal. The first one came through normally, but the second from a different user, but same address otherwise, was held. Why is this happening suddenly?

[elind]

I would appreciate advise on how to remove list.dsbl.org from my email filtering.

I seem to recall doing this a couple of years ago, but I've just spent 30 minutes trying to find it somewhere in the spamcop configuration, without success.

I don't know why it has suddenly become active this past week, but it is now holding all legitimate mail that hasn't been specifically whitelisted.

Please advise how to remove it.

Thanks

[Farelf]

...Please advise how to remove it.

Not a user myself but does Jeff G's advice in http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?...ost&p=24337 help?

[Wazoo]

I would appreciate advise on how to remove list.dsbl.org from my email filtering.

I seem to recall doing this a couple of years ago, but I've just spent 30 minutes trying to find it somewhere in the spamcop configuration, without success.

Farelf's referenced link should do it, though wondering how 30 minutes worth of clicking on various icons could have somehow not turned up the needed location. I just don't have that many icons on my screen ...

I don't know why it has suddenly become active this past week, but it is now holding all legitimate mail that hasn't been specifically whitelisted.

OK, so it's time to ask .. as it hasn't come up ... was there a possible attempt at using the Beta WebMail tool, then reverting back to the 'original' version? There is a possibility that some of your settings were changed ...???

[elind]

Sorry to not reply earlier, but I've been travelling. However the issue with dsbl.org holding mail seems to have gone away. I haven't had that much real mail, but nothing more has been held and I've changed nothing.

However, "forward. Do NOT whitelist sender" still does not work.

If I want to forward a suspected spam to look at it never arrives in my forwarded mail.

I have not knowingly changed anything.

[DavidT]

Farelf's regerenced link should do it, though wondering how 30 minutes worth of clicking on various icons could have somehow not turned up the needed location. I just don't have that many icons on my screen ...

I think I figured it out. Elind is using the "mailsc" system, rather than the webmail...there's no such function as "Forward do not whitelist" in the webmail...it's in the reporting system's display of one's Held Mail, so I'm wondering if Elind was logged into the reporting system, or into webmail when trying to deal with the blacklists?

OK, so it's time to ask .. as it hasn't come up ... was there a possible attempt at using the Beta WebMail tool, then reverting back to the 'original' version? There is a possibility that some of your settings were changed ...???

Not likely. You can go back and forth between the two without consequence, because a user's settings are stored in a shared location.

I just attempted a "Forward do not whitelist" on a test message and it was successfully released. However, I allow my SpamCop email to use my SpamCop mail account as a "final destination." Perhaps Elind is using the option to have all of the mail forwarded on to yet another location (which I don't recommend)? If so, then the likely explanation is that there's some filtering/blocking happening at the final destination. We've seen that lots of times here before when people reported that their SC email either suddenly stopped or that some wasn't arriving.

Elind?

DT

The above list should be list.dsbl.org.

I haven't had any trouble with this in the past. Now suddenly it is holding some mail.

A logical explanation of this would be that the system that's first receiving mail for you and then forwarding it to your SC account got listed on DSBL. Now that it's not happening, it would seem that the listing was removed. This assumes that it was affecting emails not sent directly to your SC address, but that were automatically forwarded to the SC mail system from another address you maintain.

DT

[StevenUnderwood]

Not likely. You can go back and forth between the two without consequence, because a user's settings are stored in a shared location.

David:

Per the Webmail Beta migration guide

Since both the new and old versions of webmail share data but use it differently, the first time you login to one after using the other you may encounter problems where you get logged out or redirected to the wrong page. The problem will correct itself after you click around a few pages, but you may need to login multiple times. I recommend that you do not switch back and forth between the old and new versions often.

It is quite possible other issues may arise switching back and forth as well. If the person in charge of the Beta test does not reccommend switching back and forth, I don't think we should be overridding that suggestion.

[DavidT]

It is quite possible other issues may arise switching back and forth as well. If the person in charge of the Beta test does not reccommend switching back and forth, I don't think we should be overridding that suggestion.

You're taking the advice too seriously, and applying it too generally. This...

I recommend that you do not switch back and forth between the old and new versions often.

... doesn't necessarily imply that changes to one's BL prefs wouldn't stick between the two versions. I tend not to be a "Nervous Nelly" about things like that, so my earlier statement stands. YMMV.

DT

[agsteele]

I think I figured it out. Elind is using the "mailsc" system, rather than the webmail...there's no such function as "Forward do not whitelist" in the webmail...it's in the reporting system's display of one's Held Mail, so I'm wondering if Elind was logged into the reporting system, or into webmail when trying to deal with the blacklists?

To expand a little... I concur that Elind was reporting via the 'mailsc' pages but he/she is finding stuff held because the dsbl list is selected in his/her webmail config.

Of course it depends on how dynamic the dsbl list is - possibly the reason these mail items were trappedf and are now not is the standard list/de-list process of that list.

Andrew

[StevenUnderwood]

You're taking the advice too seriously, and applying it too generally. This...

... doesn't necessarily imply that changes to one's BL prefs wouldn't stick between the two versions. I tend not to be a "Nervous Nelly" about things like that, so my earlier statement stands. YMMV.

DT

Not likely. You can go back and forth between the two without consequence, because a user's settings are stored in a shared location.

David, I have not run into any issues myself either in my limited switching back and forth, but have been in IT long enough to know that when 2 systems are using the same data, but using it differently, as explained here alreay, there is always a possibility for unusual things to happen. Those things may not happen in your configuration, they may not happen in my configuration, they may not happen in most configurations, but that does not mean they are not happening to some other configuration.

Your statement, "without consequense" goes directly against the reccomendation of the Beta designer. Have you looked extensively at the upgrade process for Horde IMP going up several versions? I believe they are upgrading from v2.x or early 3.x to 4.1? (the upgrade to 4.0 having issues and being dumped last year and the upgrage to more recent 3.x the time before that). The last time there were database corruption issues that arose, ultimately dooming that upgrade until a new DB could be put in place.

I stand by my statement that it has been suggested by those running the beta test that switching between the systems be minimized.

[elind]

I think I figured it out. Elind is using the "mailsc" system, rather than the webmail...there's no such function as "Forward do not whitelist" in the webmail...it's in the reporting system's display of one's Held Mail, so I'm wondering if Elind was logged into the reporting system, or into webmail when trying to deal with the blacklists?

Not likely. You can go back and forth between the two without consequence, because a user's settings are stored in a shared location.

I just attempted a "Forward do not whitelist" on a test message and it was successfully released. However, I allow my SpamCop email to use my SpamCop mail account as a "final destination." Perhaps Elind is using the option to have all of the mail forwarded on to yet another location (which I don't recommend)? If so, then the likely explanation is that there's some filtering/blocking happening at the final destination. We've seen that lots of times here before when people reported that their SC email either suddenly stopped or that some wasn't arriving.

Elind?

A logical explanation of this would be that the system that's first receiving mail for you and then forwarding it to your SC account got listed on DSBL. Now that it's not happening, it would seem that the listing was removed. This assumes that it was affecting emails not sent directly to your SC address, but that were automatically forwarded to the SC mail system from another address you maintain.

I have my main email forwarded to spamcop, which then either holds or forwards to another email address which is the one my PC reads.

I haven't changed anything in a year or two, which is why I can't remember many things. In any case the dsbl list issue seems to have gone away for now, but "forward do not whitelist sender" still functions as "delete". In other words, it is never forwarded. Again, I haven't changed anything and this started only recently. I just tried again a few minutes ago with two held spam messages. They disappeared.

Also, I notice that while I have selected "receive email notification of replies", I have not seen notification of the above response to me.

As far as I am aware my ISP is doing nothing new. It's Road Runner.

A logical explanation of this would be that the system that's first receiving mail for you and then forwarding it to your SC account got listed on DSBL. Now that it's not happening, it would seem that the listing was removed. This assumes that it was affecting emails not sent directly to your SC address, but that were automatically forwarded to the SC mail system from another address you maintain.

That makes sense, but is that likely to happen with a major ISP like Road Runner? I admit I don't know much about how these lists differ or how they are maintained, or by who.

[Wazoo]

Also, I notice that while I have selected "receive email notification of replies", I have not seen notification of the above response to me.

Nothing in the Forum e-mail error logs.

SELECT * FROM <prefix>_forum_tracker where member_id='3437'

nothing found

SELECT * FROM <prefix>_tracker where member_id='3437'

trid member_id topic_id start_date topic_track_type 
5027 3437 8486 1184615492 delayed
4984 3437 8397 1182103611 delayed
5031 3437 8489 1184673784 delayed

Per data provided at SECTION 4 - My Controls & Forum Settings of the Forum FAQ, I suggest you change the Subscription activity to "Immediate" ....

I see that you and I have gone round and round on this subject many times in the past. http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?...ost&p=54898 even includes a bit where I 'adjusted' your account, 'proved' that it all worked .... yet, here we are once again, right back at square one ....????

PM sent to once again notify that there is an answer to this issue.

[DavidT]

I have my main email forwarded to spamcop, which then either holds or forwards to another email address which is the one my PC reads.

Why? Is there any reason you don't want to POP the mail directly from SpamCop? That would take out the extra step, and probably solve your problems.

As far as I am aware my ISP is doing nothing new. It's Road Runner. That makes sense, but is that likely to happen with a major ISP like Road Runner?

The outbound mail from RoadRunner and others frequently have been affected by BL listings. I don't trust RoadRunner any farther than I can throw them, due to all the "direct to SMTP" spam spew that they have allowed over the years.

DT

[elind]

Per data provided at SECTION 4 - My Controls & Forum Settings of the Forum FAQ, I suggest you change the Subscription activity to "Immediate" ....

I see that you and I have gone round and round on this subject many times in the past. http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?...ost&p=54898 even includes a bit where I 'adjusted' your account, 'proved' that it all worked .... yet, here we are once again, right back at square one ....????

OK. I got that and have changed the settings as advised. I don't recall seeing your previous suggestion, probably because I didn't see a notification for the same reasons I keep asking the same question.

However I still haven't seen a reason why "Forward - Do not whitelist" doesn't work for me anymore. I have used spamcop for years and it has always worked until recently. DavidT suggests changing the configuration, although I thought I had the recommended one. Namely forward to spamcop for filtering first.

Perhaps there is a better way, but on the other hand I don't like to fiddle with configurations when something works and this has always worked, except now for this one annoyance that allows spam to get away. Note that I have forwarded some mail under "forward AND whitelist" and they have arrived.

Why? Is there any reason you don't want to POP the mail directly from SpamCop? That would take out the extra step, and probably solve your problems.

Are you saying that IS the cause of the problem (missing Forward- do not whitelist)? It hasn't been a problem until recently.

I suppose I could POP direct from spamcop, but I haven't had a reason to change anything for years, and I do have some other email addresses for internal use that I don't bother to send to spamcop (one of which spamcop send to me at). Seem it would just complicate the configuration to add more than one POP server to get mail from.

[DavidT]

Seem it would just complicate the configuration to add more than one POP server to get mail from.

Only a little, and once you've set it up, then not much at all. I've been popping from up to four hosts at a time for years and it doesn't slow me down. Any good email client should make it fairly simple. In addition, SpamCop allows IMAP access, which gives you yet another option at accessing your messages while they're still on SpamCop's server. When you're on the road, then you can use the SC Webmail, which allows you to configure multiple identities from which you can send and/or reply to email.

The more different systems that handle your mail, the more opportunity for problems to occur, even if things have been working fine up to now.

DT

[elind]

OK. I'll look into it more. Thanks for the advice.

I take it you don't know why I have the forwarding problem though?

Somehow just changing a configuration generally doesn't seem like an explanation for that unless it is a known bug under certain configurations?

[DavidT]

I take it you don't know why I have the forwarding problem though?

I thought that got covered earlier in this topic...but I don't have time at the moment to go back and check. A problem with getting mail from SpamCop to another ISP usually involves some sort of blocking by the other ISP. The problem with the big ISPs is that it's unlikely that you'll get them to admit that the problem is on their end, and this sort of issue is often beyond the limited understanding and capabilities of their support drones.

DT

[DavidT]

OK, I went back and looked....I also just went into my VER version of my Held Mail (which I otherwise have little use for...and don't recommend) and forwarded one of the items successfully...but again, that's because the system only had to "Forward" it from my SC Held Mail into my SC inbox...a very short and uncomplicated trip. When *you* try that, elind, the message in question has to make it through whatever filtering exists on the mail servers that are receiving the message from the SpamCop servers. I'm pretty sure that your problem lies there...if the message looked "spammy" to SpamCop, then it probably also looks "spammy" to your local ISP and they're blocking the message, putting it into a Junk folder that you've not checked, or something like that. If you stop having your SC email account mail forwarded off the system, then that problem will disappear.

DT

[elind]

I'm baaaack.

I appreciate the relies earlier, and while I may mess around with the overall configuration eventually, this one has worked for years and I don't lightly change what I don't have to.

There might be an assumption here that that was a solution to the missing "forward - do not whitelist sender" email from held mail. This function stopped working for me relatively recently (but "forward - whitelist" does work) and I still have no idea why and would like to have it working again.

If this forum is not the place to get that answer, please advise who I can contact at spamcop.

[Wazoo]

If this forum is not the place to get that answer, please advise who I can contact at spamcop.

Where to get Help

Not finding the Help you need?

Just a couple of places to look .. How many more do you need?

The largest 'issue' woth your 'problem' seems to be that it isn't seen by others, which would normally suggest that the issue isn't based on JT's servers ....????

[StevenUnderwood]

I'm baaaack.

I appreciate the relies earlier, and while I may mess around with the overall configuration eventually, this one has worked for years and I don't lightly change what I don't have to.

There might be an assumption here that that was a solution to the missing "forward - do not whitelist sender" email from held mail. This function stopped working for me relatively recently (but "forward - whitelist" does work) and I still have no idea why and would like to have it working again.

If this forum is not the place to get that answer, please advise who I can contact at spamcop.

I believe (at least the way I was interpreting it) that you should try the function when the forward destination would be to SpamCop's own server. This will eliminate SpamCop as the problem. I have tested the function and it has worked every time. It may be that whatever caused the message to be listed as possible spam is also causing your ISP to drop the message due to spam.