[plug] re: login problems

[Brian Tombleson]

----- Original Message -----
From: <jlmiller at mmtnetworks.com.au>
To: "Plug (E-mail)" <plug at linux.org.au>
Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2000 4:42 PM
Subject: [plug] re: login problems


> What does the 2nd line mean
> Aug  8 16:41:04 gateway ipop3d[9965]: Login failure user=dwilkinson
host=[192.168.2.11]
> Aug  8 16:41:10 gateway ipop3d[9965]: Command stream end of file while
reading line user=dwilkinson host=[192.168.2.11]
>

I would guess and say the encoding has failed or not used a compatible
standard and the transfer is finding command sequences in the data where
it's not expecting them.

.. Of course, could be the systems way of telling you it timed out too.

I'm not actually replying to this post because I have a correct answer
(surprise! :), I'm actually wondering why mails from Jon (and a couple of
other people) don't have thier originating address as the list, but their
own e-mail address in the 'Reply-To' header ?  I would've thought that even
if his mail client forced the 'Reply-To', it would be stripped through the
list (?)

For other enquioring minds, here's the complete header:

Return-Path: <plug-request at plug.linux.org.au>
Received: from spark.plug.linux.org.au (spark.plug.linux.org.au
[202.61.164.81])
 by paradigmit.com.au (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e788iEh09291
 for <Brian at ParadigmIT.com.au>; Tue, 8 Aug 2000 16:44:16 +0800
Received: by spark.plug.linux.org.au (Postfix, from userid 38)
 id 72CEB18D9; Tue,  8 Aug 2000 16:42:47 +0800 (WST)
Old-Return-Path: <owner-plug at plug.linux.org.au>
Delivered-To: plug at plug.linux.org.au
From: jlmiller at mmtnetworks.com.au
Message-Id: <200008080842.QAA08634 at gateway.mmtnetworks.com.au>
Reply-To: "Jon L. Miller" <jlmiller at mmtnetworks.com.au>
To: Plug (E-mail) <plug at linux.org.au>
Cc:
Date: 08 Aug 2000 16:42:29 +0800
X-Mailer: NeoPlanet Version: 5.1.0.1504
X-ID: 940A2C8055C511D4BD9900A0CC529D5A
X-Brand: NeoPlanet
X-Build: 1504
Subject: [plug] re: login problems
Resent-Message-ID: <29uqBC.A.eIF.Fg8j5 at spark>
Resent-From: plug at plug.linux.org.au
X-Mailing-List: <plug at plug.linux.org.au> archive/latest/3675
X-Loop: plug at plug.linux.org.au
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: plug-request at plug.linux.org.au
Resent-Date: Tue,  8 Aug 2000 16:42:47 +0800 (WST)
X-UIDL: 062d3f77a44235ab8266ee1a82ff0fb4

Compare it to one Mike Holland send a short time ago ..

Return-Path: <plug-request at plug.linux.org.au>
Received: from spark.plug.linux.org.au (spark.plug.linux.org.au
[202.61.164.81])
 by paradigmit.com.au (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e788Fih09134
 for <Brian at ParadigmIT.com.au>; Tue, 8 Aug 2000 16:15:45 +0800
Received: by spark.plug.linux.org.au (Postfix, from userid 38)
 id BDC3C18D6; Tue,  8 Aug 2000 16:15:22 +0800 (WST)
Old-Return-Path: <owner-plug at plug.linux.org.au>
Delivered-To: plug at plug.linux.org.au
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 16:14:32 +0800 (WST)
From: Mike Holland <myk at golden.wattle.id.au>
To: plug at plug.linux.org.au
Subject: Re: [plug] RPM
In-Reply-To: <00Aug8.160429wst.119052 at epagate.environ.wa.gov.au>
Message-ID:
<Pine.LNX.4.21.0008081611240.31323-100000 at salween.golden.wattle.id.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <dDC85.A.V-E.YG8j5 at spark>
Resent-From: plug at plug.linux.org.au
Reply-To: plug at plug.linux.org.au
X-Mailing-List: <plug at plug.linux.org.au> archive/latest/3668
X-Loop: plug at plug.linux.org.au
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: plug-request at plug.linux.org.au
Resent-Date: Tue,  8 Aug 2000 16:15:22 +0800 (WST)
X-UIDL: cf4f985361b1178676b2fec7bd691550


I can't see what would be significant enough to alter this behavior ?

Thoughts?

- Brian.