KCLUG

kclug@kclug.org

4 participants
3291 discussions

RE: test
by Kelsay, Brian - Kansas City, MO 17 Feb '06

17 Feb '06

Exactly. There are two problems. The fallback or secondary MX record in DNS and the mail server connection failure that causes the secondary MX record to be used. >-----Original Message----- >From: kclug-bounces(a)kclug.org >On Behalf Of djgoku >Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 9:50 AM > >> I discussed this at length with Hal on IRC tonight. In 2004, Mike >> Neulip, offered to transfer the domain. We are not going to take him >> up on that. However, we are going to transfer the DNS servers to our >> own, though. I am initiating that request. The result of which will >> take several days if not weeks. For the second time, end of >> thread. Period. > >Has to do with this I presume. I don't know enough about DNS >stuff. So DNS is the problem for the internet connectivity >problem that Hal speaks of here or?: > >> What appears to be happening is this. For some reason there is some >> sort of intermittent connectivity issue with the main kclug.org >> server. There is a fallback MX record that points to the previous >> kclug.org server that is in Chicago which is no longer set >up to receive email for kclug.org. > >Do we have logs of the connection problem does Netstandard >also have logs of these problems? I see there are two problems >connection problems to KCLUG server and DNS stuff right?>

2 1

RE: test
by Kelsay, Brian - Kansas City, MO 17 Feb '06

17 Feb '06

More ranting and raving like yesterday all over a simple question that I posed about an email error. And then my little short bus buddy goes and makes it into a funny. Love the bash.org quote. Beep. Beep. >-----Original Message----- >From: kclug-bounces(a)kclug.org >On Behalf Of djgoku >Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 9:38 AM > >On 2/17/06, Frank Wiles <> wrote: >> >> Ok this is really getting ridiculous people. I was hoping that >> KCLUG would eventually pick back up and improve the signal >> to stupid >> ratio, but it obviously hasn't. > >Yah it hasn't. Can't we all just get along. Gosh...Idiot... ( >Not calling anyone an idiot just quoting a movie =:0) Napoleon >Dynamite for the people that don't know what I am talking about. ) > >> Jason, this post is what finally did it for me. Some tips for your >> future, it's probably not wise to cuss at the community >> you have such >> a vested interest in and for something as silly as mailing list >> posting formats. There are some really important and useful things >> to be upset and passionate about in the real world, maybe >> you should >> take up one of those as your crusade instead? > >Yah cussing in ML/IRC reminds me of this quote from Bash.org #140580: ><delzi> Arguing in the internet is like running in the special >olympics, even if you win you are still retarded. > >I am not making fun of special people by using this quote, my >point is that arguing/cussing about stuff just makes you feel >like you are in control/authority. I have done something like >this before, and have learned that this isn't the best way to >accomplish things > >So how hard is it to fix the current situation being >connection problems with KCLUG server, is there logs of >"these" problems happening?

1 0

RE: test
by Kelsay, Brian - Kansas City, MO 17 Feb '06

17 Feb '06

> -----Original Message----- > From: On Behalf Of Luke-Jr > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 10:31 PM > > >On Thursday 16 February 2006 15:38, Kelsay, Brian - Kansas > >City, MO wrote: > > >Luke-Jr wrote: > > > eh... want to 'federate' MX backup? :) > > > > Huh? WTF? Over. I'm just saying that maybe we ought to > >look at the secondary MX record in DNS. > > In other words, we could make a list of domains we control > and mail servers we control, and agree to do MX backup for > each other's domains on our mail servers. Now that makes sense. :)

1 0

RE: test
by Kelsay, Brian - Kansas City, MO 17 Feb '06

17 Feb '06

Huh? WTF? Over. I'm just saying that maybe we ought to look at the secondary MX record in DNS. -----Original Message----- From: On Behalf Of Luke-Jr Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 8:27 AM To: kclug(a)kclug.org Subject: Re: test On Thursday 16 February 2006 13:40, Kelsay, Brian - Kansas City, MO wrote: > Aha! So the ILLIANA.net server (old server) is there and knows it isn't > supposed to be receiving the messages. I'd say that whoever has the > access to the DNS records for the LUG needs to remove the fallback MX > record completely or shange it to something that can spool and > eventually forward the mail correctly. eh... want to 'federate' MX backup? :)

6 7

RE: test
by Kelsay, Brian - Kansas City, MO 16 Feb '06

16 Feb '06

Sorry about the top-posting, excess snippage, and whatever else is annoying you about my message style. I've said before that I am forced to use a crappy mail client at work, currently Outlook '03, previously Outlook XP for a brief time and before that Groupwise 6.0. Groupwise did nothing to help with indenting and putting the nice little ">" symbol or anything else at the beginning of the line of the previous poster's message. By default Outlook doesn't either. I thought I had it all tricked out in Outlook XP and then I got a new system image whipped out on me. Lost all my user settings, .sigs, even custom address book, no biggy. More signs of why not to use MS crap when you don't have to. But I have no choice while at work and do my best with getting info, answers and questions to the list when I have time amoungst all this crappy software to think about Linux. I try to trim extra email addresses, PGP signatures, maillist tag lines, sigs, and cruft that is not pertinant. I even try to use good grammar, punctuation, spelling and use a little coherent thought in my messages. Whether top or bottom posting, I feel my messages are readable and you can follow the thought patterns if you are following a mail thread. Who actually comes in on something in the middle of a conversation and expects to understand an issue without seeing the original message? The WTF message was suppose to go to Luke-Jr only, since I didn't understand his meaning of "federated MX". I still don't. Don't get on people for too much trimming when you did the exact same thing in your postings. You trimmed all of Frank's lucid post except for what was relevant. Makes sense to me, but it is the exact thing you got pissed at me about. I know Tom just likes to poke you with a stick when maillist standards come up, but you act as if I and other users top-post, bottom post, trim or whatever in order to confuse, obfuscate, or piss you off. That could not be further from the truth. I just want to get ideas out there, get things fixed and move on. But that is not the issue, the broken MX record, if that is the problem, is the issue, let's concentrate on fixing that. -----Original Message----- From: On Behalf Of Jason Clinton Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 2:51 PM On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 14:25 -0600, Frank Wiles wrote: > I certainly understand your frustration, but instead of getting angry > about it, just do what I do. If I can't read the E-mail, I move on... I appreciate your tempered response and a more rational approach to the issue however, I find that I can not just let it slide. I am personally invested in the vitality of the local Linux community. In the past 3 <blah, blah snip> So, I would appreciate it if people would try to avoid being inconsiderate of others. Every mailing to this list is on permanent record and, more importantly, has a lasting effect on those who read it. Please consider the consequences, however small, when you hit send. -- Jason Clinton <me(a)jasonclinton.com>

2 1

Domain Registrars
by Don Erickson 16 Feb '06

16 Feb '06

Greetings luggites: I have a question about peoples' experiences with domain registrars. I migrated away from Network Solutions about five years ago, and have been mostly content with registerfly.com (although their web interface has expanded until it has become an incomprehensible tangled mass of crap, but I digress) until about a month ago, when they have been unable to renew a domain that was originally registered through them. They're a reseller for ENOM and apparently now they're transferring the domains to themsleves before renewing, which is apparently beyond their capabilities. I received a support ticket email stating that the "transfer" had been approved and the domain would be renewed in a couple of days, but alas, no. This is rather astounding incompetence, so it's obviously time to move on. Anyway, who do you guys use, and what are the normal prices and pros and cons? Cheap is good, but competence is critical. Regards, -Don

2 1

RE: Domain Registrars
by Daniel Siemens 16 Feb '06

16 Feb '06

I find that poehosting.com to be pretty good. Their UI work but it's like everyone else you have to figure it out. 1 Year for a .com is 8.00. -----Original Message----- From: kclug-bounces(a)kclug.org [mailto:kclug-bounces@kclug.org] On Behalf Of Don Erickson Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 3:39 PM To: kclug(a)kclug.org Subject: Domain Registrars Greetings luggites: I have a question about peoples' experiences with domain registrars. I migrated away from Network Solutions about five years ago, and have been mostly content with registerfly.com (although their web interface has expanded until it has become an incomprehensible tangled mass of crap, but I digress) until about a month ago, when they have been unable to renew a domain that was originally registered through them. They're a reseller for ENOM and apparently now they're transferring the domains to themsleves before renewing, which is apparently beyond their capabilities. I received a support ticket email stating that the "transfer" had been approved and the domain would be renewed in a couple of days, but alas, no. This is rather astounding incompetence, so it's obviously time to move on. Anyway, who do you guys use, and what are the normal prices and pros and cons? Cheap is good, but competence is critical. Regards, -Don _______________________________________________ Kclug mailing list Kclug(a)kclug.org http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug

1 0

RE: test
by Kelsay, Brian - Kansas City, MO 16 Feb '06

16 Feb '06

-----Original Message----- From: kclug-bounces(a)kclug.org [mailto:kclug-bounces@kclug.org] On Behalf Of Hal Duston Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 10:41 PM To: kclug(a)kclug.org Subject: Re: test > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > - > > The original message was received at Mon, 13 Feb > > 2006 08:57:33 -0700 > > from [165.221.20.101] > > > > ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal > > errors ----- > > <kclug(a)kclug.org> > > (reason: 553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list > > of allowed > > rcpthosts (#5.7.1)) > > > > ----- Transcript of session follows ----- > > ... while talking to mail.illi.net.: > > >>> RCPT To:<kclug(a)kclug.org> > > <<< 553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list of > > allowed rcpthosts > > (#5.7.1) > > 550 5.1.1 <kclug(a)kclug.org>... User unknown What appears to be happening is this. For some reason there is some sort of intermittent connectivity issue with the main kclug.org server. There is a fallback MX record that points to the previous kclug.org server that is in Chicago which is no longer set up to receive email for kclug.org. -- Hal Duston --------------------------------------------- Aha! So the ILLIANA.net server (old server) is there and knows it isn't supposed to be receiving the messages. I'd say that whoever has the access to the DNS records for the LUG needs to remove the fallback MX record completely or shange it to something that can spool and eventually forward the mail correctly. I thought it looked weird seeing mail.illi.net in the header. Brian

2 1

test
by Kelsay, Brian - Kansas City, MO 16 Feb '06

16 Feb '06

I tried to reply to a message this morning and got the error below. WTF? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - The original message was received at Mon, 13 Feb 2006 08:57:33 -0700 from [165.221.20.101] ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- <kclug(a)kclug.org> (reason: 553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts (#5.7.1)) ----- Transcript of session follows ----- ... while talking to mail.illi.net.: >>> RCPT To:<kclug(a)kclug.org> <<< 553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts (#5.7.1) 550 5.1.1 <kclug(a)kclug.org>... User unknown

4 3

Which wireless card?
by Kelsay, Brian - Kansas City, MO 13 Feb '06

13 Feb '06

Second try sending. You could always do what I did and have recommended here frequently: Google search for Linux wireless lan or wlan. These three will yield lots of info. I'm not sure how up to date the list is, but I found cards there they I could use. The Intel 2200 and 2915 in Centrino laptops work too. http://www.linux-wlan.org/ www.linux-wlan.org/docs/wlan_adapters.html.gz the list www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Jean_Tourrilhes/Linux/ -----Original Message----- From: On Behalf Of Leo Mauler Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 9:29 AM It is so hard to find the right wireless card since manufacturers never seem to want to put the name of the chipset on the box. And once you have the shrinkwrap off the box, the computer store frequently takes a dim view of returns, especially when the reason is "An operating system with, officially, about 5% of the market, won't work with this card." I guess what the KCLUG list really needs is a list of local stores which have a reasonable return policy that doesn't require the device to be completely non-functional (in a Windows box) to exchange it for another wireless card. It would be nice as well to have a link to a compact list of all the compatible wireless chipsets for loading into your PDA. Yes ornico wireless cards are really nice, but again, hard to find the right chipset.

1 0

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

KCLUG