Re: CMUCL mailing list changes

Raymond Toy wrote on Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 04:31:04PM -0700: 
> On 7/20/13 1:45 PM, Martin Cracauer wrote:
> > Folks.
> >
> > I reactivated the CMUCL list after a wave of spam took down the
> > machine doing @cons.org (as opposed to @cmucl.cons.org) with heavy
> > disk I/O caused by mismatching spamfilters between the @cons.org
> > forwarder and the ML software on @cmucl.cons.org
> >
> > Unless this causes great concern I would like to make
> > @cmucl.cons.org 
> > The only supported bunch of addresses and not support @cons.org
> > anymore.  The forwarding means I tunnel some of my own spamfilters.
> 
> I couldn't quite parse this last paragraph.  Does this mean that cmucl
> mailing lists @cons.org will no longer exist and all mail should go to
> @cmucl.cons.org?  If so, do existing list members need to do anything to
> be subscribed?

I am asking the community whether we can live without the old
@cons.org addresses.  Not only are they spam magnets, they make
spamfighting at cons.org more difficult since the MX for @cons.org is
defended differently than @cmucl.cons.org and the forwarding from the
former to the ladder got into software problem leading to a machine
overload. 

> > If that's all right, whoever does the webpages would please need to
> > adjust http://www.cons.org/cmucl/support.html
> >
> > However, *please* hide this in a gif or some javascript because the
> > bombardment of the old addresses is just staggering and it comes from
> > all those places on the web that have no or naive obfuscation.
> 
> I'll adjust that as soon as I can and try to hide it.  Sorry for
> producing so much spam.

The old addresses have been on web pages since 1996.  No wonder
something piles up :-)

Martin
-- 
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Martin Cracauer <[email protected]>   http://www.cons.org/cracauer/
_______________________________________________
cmucl-imp mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.zs64.net/mailman/listinfo/cmucl-imp