Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

GMail and Sourceforge E-mail Bouncing Saga 242

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the why-can't-we-all-just-get-along dept.
An anonymous reader writes "All e-mail going back and forth from Sourceforge and Gmail is being bounced. This leaves many Open Source projects with helpless mailing lists. Fortunately, Sourceforge blames Google and Google is blaming SourceForge for this. The Sourceforge support site is clogged with support requests for a resolution to this problem. Google's response to this bouncing has been automated e-mails saying it is probably at the other end of mail delivery. This is something that the community needs to know about since it has been going on for a week already with no end in sight." Worth noting that Sourceforge and Slashdot are both part of OSTG. Update 20:07 GMT by SM: According to SourceForge support staff this issue is now resolved. Apparently a few days ago the sender-verify to gmail started resulting in 450 errors. Google has since either corrected this issue or whitelisted SourceForge and several tests of the system have resulted in correct delivery.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

GMail and Sourceforge E-mail Bouncing Saga

Comments Filter:
  • Sourforge? (Score:3, Funny)

    by eldavojohn (898314) * <eldavojohn@nOspAM.gmail.com> on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @11:13AM (#16305991) Journal
    Worth noting that Sourforge and Slashdot are both part of OSTG.
    After all the great software I've found on there, I'd call it sweetforge.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @11:16AM (#16306049)
    The summary was useless, there's only a few things I want to know about this spat. Who sends the first DSN, why and why was it rejected by the other party?
    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Technical details of temporary failure:
      TEMP_FAILURE: SMTP Error (state 9): 451-Could not complete
      sender verify callout
      451-Could not complete sender verify callout for
      .
      451-The mail server(s) for the domain may be temporarily
      unreachable, or
      451-they may be permanently unreachable from this server. In
      the latter case,
      451-you need to change the address or create an MX record
      for its domain
      451-if it is supposed to be generally accessible from the
      Internet.
      451 Talk to your mail administrator for details.
    • by ben there... (946946) on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @11:48AM (#16306555) Journal
      In my opinion, the problem with SourceForge lies in that Mailman doesn't work well with Gmail addresses. I use Mailman discussion lists on my DreamHost account, and while testing I couldn't get the emails to work until I added a non-gmail account. I contacted support, blaming them for a while and getting frustrated, until I tried a different email account.

      This was DreamHost's response:
      I've closed out this ticket for you. I thought I should mention however
      that quite a few people that have forwards to gmail have ran into similar
      problem, the only thing that is consistent is that the messages make it
      to the gmail relays and then disappear.

      I don't know if that means that GMail rejects Mailman messages, or Mailman has problems sending to Gmail addresses, but one way or another, it doesn't work right.
      --
      Use coupon DH75OFF to get $75 off hosting at DreamHost.com
      • by HiThere (15173) *
        Well, one thing it means is that I'm glad I don't use GMail.

        And it appears to mean that you shouldn't use GMail if you want to talk to SourceForge.

        Presumably things will eventually be fixed, but for now that looks like the proper "answer".
      • No they don't (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Just Some Guy (3352)
        SourceForge doesn't use Mailman - as an MTA. Instead, Mailman re-sends messages using their main MTA, probably Sendmail or Postfix (I'm too lazy to look). In other words, Mailman never connects directly to the GMail servers, so I'd be extremely hesitant to blame it.
    • From the link ... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by khasim (1285)

      TEMP_FAILURE: SMTP Error (state 9):
      451-Could not complete sender verify callout
      451-Could not complete sender verify callout for .

      So, it would seem that SourceForge cannot verify the sender of incoming messages from GMail so SourceForge is issuing a temporary rejection.

      Is GMail correctly handling the temp rejects?

      The solution would be:
      a. Find out where the sender verify callout is breaking and fix that.

      b. Disable sender verify callout until you can do "a".

  • by Chris_Jefferson (581445) on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @11:18AM (#16306071) Homepage
    The message linked to in the post says the person is having trouble with both gmail and sending mail from his own domain. I have also had trouble with sourceforge, where mails from my ISP seemed to be "eaten" about half the time. I've just moved mailing lists off sourceforge, although I'm still using them as their svn support is good. Unless anyone else is having trouble with gmail, I'm tempted to just lay all of the blame at sourceforge.
    • by srussell (39342) on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @12:04PM (#16306861) Homepage Journal
      Unless anyone else is having trouble with gmail, I'm tempted to just lay all of the blame at sourceforge.
      Hear, hear. Considering all of the problems I've (personally) encountered with SourceForge (broken databases, unresponsive, utterly down) and how few problems I've seen with Google (as in, none), I'd be inclined to think the problem is on SourceForge's end. Google has a reputation for reliability and quality. SourceForge, on the other hand...

      --- SER

      • by harmonica (29841)
        Google's AdSense service has problems on a regular basis. Some of the smaller new beta projects have even more. "Google reliability" depends on the exact service. Web search runs smoothly, but I've also encountered outages there.
  • Umm (Score:5, Funny)

    by nizo (81281) * on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @11:19AM (#16306097) Homepage Journal
    Fortunately, Sourceforge blames Google and Google is blaming SourceForge for this.


    I don't think that word means what you think it means. Unless you are glad that no one is willing to take responsibility for the problem and fix it???

    • Re:Umm (Score:5, Informative)

      by Rob T Firefly (844560) on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @11:24AM (#16306175) Homepage Journal
      Fortunately, the word Schadenfreude [wikipedia.org] does mean what I think it means.
      • Lisa: Dad, do you know what Schadenfreude is?

        Homer: No, I do not know what shaden-frawde is. [sarcasm] Please tell me, because I'm dying to know.

        Lisa: It's a German term for `shameful joy', taking pleasure in the suffering of others.

        Homer: Oh, come on Lisa. I'm just glad to see him fall flat on his butt! [getting mad] He's usually all happy and comfortable, and surrounded by loved ones, and it makes me feel... What's the opposite of that shameful joy thing of yours?

        Lisa: [nastily] Sour grapes.

        Homer:
    • by BeeBeard (999187)
      I understood it as sarcasm, code for something like "isn't it almost always the case that companies refuse to be accountable for screwups?" That one word could be shorthand for all of that is what's so great about language. ;)

    • Re:Umm (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @11:27AM (#16306227)
      Hello, I'm sarcasm, I don't believe we've met before.
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Ravensfire (209905)
      I think you need to turn on your Sarcasm Detector (TM)(Patent Pending).

      -- Ravensfire
    • by Billosaur (927319) *

      Unless you are glad that no one is willing to take responsibility for the problem and fix it???

      But of course! People are always taking responsibility for the error of their ways ("I was molested as a child by priests," "I didn't see the iceberg," "They told me they were herbal supplements," etc.). It's nice to see a couple of groups turning over a new leaf and denying that either have anything to do with the problem rather than having this tedious mucking about taking the initiative, issuing mea culpas,

  • by jazzkat (901547) on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @11:24AM (#16306173)
    I've had cases where mail coming from SourceForge never reached me; their servers never even attempted to connect to my e-mail server (i.e. nothing in the logs to indicate this). I was running my own DNS at the time, at a colocation center, and never had problems sending or receiving e-mail before with any other domains.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @11:27AM (#16306239)
    ...you all have the source code, and the developers do not consider this a priority, so feel free to solve your problem and post a patch
  • by LiquidCoooled (634315) on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @11:28AM (#16306249) Homepage Journal
    Greetings,

    This is something recent that has changed in how Google handles
    email (other sites have started to get the same errors). We
    are investigating how to deal with this.

    SourceForge.net Support


    Is it because sourceforge is not following the RFCs and google has just tightened up?

    We had a similar issue in one of our programs where mailing worked wonderfully for months and months for all customers, then one morning complaints started.
    It appears as though we weren't following the RFCs to the letter and the main isp in our country (bt) had updated to a more stringent mail server (we shockingly used an additional CR where one was not expected...).

    This all sounds similar.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by jfinke (68409)
      Been there as well. Our developers were using a old library that was compliant to the old SMTP RFC, but not that new one. When we switched firewalls from proxy (which was rewriting the smtp packets under the new RFC) to statefull inspection 5% of our clients has munged up attachments. It was really odd.
  • eh (Score:4, Funny)

    by erikdotla (609033) on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @11:33AM (#16306331)
    Troubleshooting IT on message boards involving the public is a highly effective way to get things done.

    Allow me to start. *ahem*

    WHY is SourceForge even using SMTP????!!!
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by einhverfr (238914)
      Because X.400 isn't as widely accepted yet ;-)

      What we REALLY need is a full OSI protocol stack build on top of TCP/IP so we can use all the wonderful features of X.400, X.500 (instead of messy LDAP), and so forth!
      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by idontgno (624372)

        Because X.400 isn't at all accepted, anywhere, and never was ;-)

        There, corrected that typo for you.

        • by einhverfr (238914)
          Actually it was accepted briefly in some areas (which is why Exchange 5.5 included an X.400 connector). Most notably in the military.

          Of course that is different from the point of my post which is largely that the alternatives to SMTP are overengineered monsters like X.400....
          • by 3247 (161794)
            Of course that is different from the point of my post which is largely that the alternatives to SMTP are overengineered monsters like X.400....
            UUCP?
  • by patio11 (857072) on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @11:33AM (#16306333)
    Who is the Slashdotter to root for? Hmm... I know, third option! It is Microsoft's fault!
  • by tecker (793737) on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @11:39AM (#16306419) Homepage
    Original Response:
    Google's response to this bouncing has been automated e-mails saying it is probably at the other end of mail delivery.
    New Response:
    "Well Gmail is still in beta so don't blame us."
  • by Toe, The (545098) on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @11:42AM (#16306471)
    Sure, there are RFCs and other standards to ensure that if an e-mail isn't delivered, someone is notified, but those are hardly written in stone. Sometimes e-mail just disappears into the wonderful world of dev/null.

    There is never, ever any absolute guarantee that an e-mail is going to reach its destination, just as there is no way of knowing if that letter you drop in a mailbox is really going to go where it is supposed to.

    If you're trying to maintain a discussion, use a bulletin board. There you can see whether your message was posted, and... as long as the host is up, other people will see what you see.

    In any event, people gotta learn that technology is never 100% reliable. You'd think we'd understand this by now.
    • Sure, email is not 100% reliable. Got it. It sounds as though this particular link is nearly 0% reliable. If the mail room at your credit card company loses one payment, that's not cause for a complaint. If they lose nearly every payment sent from a given state, you can bet that would be cause for a complaint.
      • by Toe, The (545098)
        The thing about computers is that they can do the wrong thing much faster and much more reliably than humans.
    • There is never, ever any absolute guarantee that an e-mail is going to reach its destination, just as there is no way of knowing if that letter you drop in a mailbox is really going to go where it is supposed to.

      Maybe not, but everything works better if there is at least some attempt to warn the sender that something screwed up. For this reason even if Google did change their mail system to be more compliant, they should recognise non-compliant e-mail and either handle it or send an explanation on why they
  • SPF records.... (Score:4, Informative)

    by leto (8058) on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @11:43AM (#16306473) Homepage
    Google has SPF records. Sourceforge seems to reject mail that seems spoofed (eg people 'pretending' to be allowed to send user@gmail.com mail without going through google.

    It's neither sourceforge's fault not google's fault. It's the enduser's fault. You must send/receive email through google's gmail system.

    You get what you pay for.....
    • On my latest open source project (LedgerSMB), several of us including both project admins have been unable to send email to the lists from Gmail accounts because of this issue. Our mailing lists have thus been basically down because of this.

      It is a *very serious* problem for Sourceforge. Before all this happened, we were actually talking about using Google Code instead.

      If you are interested in what LedgerSMB [ledgersmb.org] is, it is a truly open fork of SQL-Ledger with a real attention to security and data integrity. C
    • Re:SPF records.... (Score:5, Informative)

      by nuzak (959558) on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @12:57PM (#16307755) Journal
      > Google has SPF records. Sourceforge seems to reject mail that seems spoofed (eg people 'pretending' to be allowed to send user@gmail.com mail without going through google.

      SPF has nothing to do with it. Sourceforge is employing callback verification, which is not only abuse itself (it's basically a dictionary attack that we're just supposed to trust is for good and not evil), it's also incredibly broken.

      See http://atm.tut.fi/list-archive/nanog/msg37172.html [atm.tut.fi] for an explanation.

      Just one more reason to jump ship from sourceforget.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by SiliconEntity (448450)
      It's neither sourceforge's fault not google's fault. It's the enduser's fault. You must send/receive email through google's gmail system.

      That's not the case here. I use gmail solely through the web interface, nothing fancy going on at all. I'm subscribed to my SF.NET mailing lists at the same address I'm sending from. But my mail is bouncing. And this has been going on for a week now, since last Wednesday.

      If it is an SPF problem, then one of the two of them is implementing it wrong, because all gmail users
    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Gmail.com SPF record is:

      _spf.google.com descriptive text "v=spf1 ip4:216.239.56.0/23 ip4:64.233.160.0/19 ip4:66.249.80.0/20 ip4:72.14.192.0/18 ?all"

      the ?all at the end means that their is no policy how forged mail is going to be handled by SPF aware MTAs and defaults to accept.

      see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sender_Policy_Framewo rk [wikipedia.org]
  • I beg to differ (Score:5, Informative)

    by geoffspear (692508) on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @11:48AM (#16306541) Homepage
    "All e-mail going back and forth from Sourceforge and Gmail" is certainly not being bounced. My Gmail account has been getting plenty of email from Sourceforge during the period when "all e-mail" has supposedly been bouncing.

    Of course, this is the sort of accuracy I expect from Slashdot.

  • Callbacks Are Evil (Score:3, Informative)

    by ccandreva (409807) <chris@westnet.com> on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @11:52AM (#16306629) Homepage
    I would say this is Gmail's problem.

    Gmail is initiating what are called call-backs. For every incoming e-mail, they attempt to send a fake e-mail back to the sender to verify that the sending address actually exists.

    The theory is that since spammers forge many names, it will reject spams that have made up names forged into them.

    The end result, however, is that it pushes your spam problem back on to the domain forged into the spam. It causes an extra load on that server as it has to accept all these bogus connections. For another it will just encourage spammers to forge other people's actual addresses as the sender of their garbage.

    It is encouraging to see that Sourceforge does not support that. I would give the solution as to either complain to Gmail that callbacks break they stated goal of "Do no evil".

    Barring that, don't use gmail.
    • by 140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @12:00PM (#16306769) Journal
      Initially callbacks will be evil as you say. But if gmail implements a learning system and starts tagging which ip addresses in the call chain are routinely sending spam it can become better. So at some point it will detect spam without actually calling back. So give them some slack please.
      • by idontgno (624372)

        Initially callbacks will be evil as you say.

        Agreed.

        ...starts tagging which ip addresses in the call chain are routinely sending spam

        Because spammers are tards and never never NEVER change which bots they use for their spam runs. And the bots are all on static IP addresses so prevalent in the dial-up and consumer broadband arena. So, learn IP address once, good forever.

        So give them some slack please.

        When they stop violating the inter-MTA interchange dictated by standards [faqs.org]. Until then... well, at least y

        • Your standards are obsolete [ietf.org].
        • by 140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @03:07PM (#16309889) Journal
          It is true that there are vast botnets. And the spammers routinely change the bots. And most bots are on dynamic ip address that keeps changing. You are right in saying that I or you or most other companies would not have the resources to combat spam by tagging the ip addresses. But if there is a company that has the resources, both in terms of money and in terms of searching, organizing and finding patterns it would be Google.

          Most legitimate mailservers are running on static ip addresses. Google will be able to compile a list of legitimate good mailservers rather quickly. Google is also an IP address registrar. It has the routing tables and other registration information and netblock ownership information. It will know the dynamic ip addresses by the block. Mailservers running on dynamic addresses, or relays running dynamic addresses are suspect immediately. It is not proof. But more like preponderance of evidence (IANAL).

          Can they determine spam without callbacks in three months. No way. Can they reduce the number of callbacks to confirm legitimacy of email by atleast an order of magnitude? Yes, they can by collecting relay ip addresses, mail server ip addresses, netblock ownership data and putting them all together like "page-rank", "mailserver-rank". They might even find the bots and inform the ISP that they probably have a bot and the ISPs might even contact the boob with the infected machine. Good things can come out of this.

          Will they? There you got me. Dont know if they will. But I hope they do.

    • If gmail is rejecting the message because the callback failed so they think it's spam, why don't they at least put it in the spam folder?

      (Or, how do I get to the "Show all messages regardless of what you think; I'll decide whether it's spam or not" option?)
    • by nuzak (959558)
      > Gmail is initiating what are called call-backs.

      From my read of the bounce, it looks like sourceforge is the one doing the callbacks. Am I wrong here?

      http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=199035&cid= 16307185 [slashdot.org]

    • by makomk (752139)
      Gmail is initiating what are called call-backs. For every incoming e-mail, they attempt to send a fake e-mail back to the sender to verify that the sending address actually exists.

      The theory is that since spammers forge many names, it will reject spams that have made up names forged into them.


      Out of curiosity, how does this interact with greylisting? (Or indeed, what happens when the receiving SMTP server is down or overloaded?)

      It doesn't really seem like a good idea, especially as IIRC some SMTP
  • pragmatism (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Speare (84249) on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @11:54AM (#16306651) Homepage Journal

    A pragmatic solution would be to say, "I don't care whose fault it is, we will disable/filter our automatic reply system on our end for a couple days until a real solution can be found." The chances of someone being pragmatic on ONE side is pretty good, and while it wouldn't be necessary, the chances of someone being pragmatic on BOTH sides isn't too terrible to contemplate either.

    Once you turn off the water at an upstream valve, fixing the actual pipe rupture gets a lot easier. Just git 'er done.

  • The Solution (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Cytlid (95255) on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @12:04PM (#16306849)
    Um, INCOASFML (I'm not currently on a source forge mailing list) but the way I've been operating for years would probably remedy this situation. I have my own domain... I run my own sendmail (insert MTA flamewar here, perhaps someday I'll switch to postfix or qmail or something). I have my own webmail, but it sucks. I signed up for gmail with an obscure username. Gave *noone* the account name. I just forwarded my user on my colocated machine to GMail, and have GMail use that username as a reply to address. Works great. GMail's become my glorified webmail client (it beats the crap outta my other ones).

      So at the end of the day, have your friendly local neighborhood mail admin forward a real domain account to your gmail. Then just change it on sourceforge's list. Then I'm not subject to gmails (or sourceforges) mail policies, only my own.
    • by dschuetz (10924)
      I have my own webmail, but it sucks.

      Have you tried RoundCube [roundcube.net]? It's not perfect, but it's better than (for example) SquirrelMail, and has a reasonably active development group. It's about the best I've found, at least among those that are truly web-based (as opposed to downloading a "lightweight" flash client).

    • hosted gmail (Score:4, Informative)

      by jasonhamilton (673330) <jason@nospAM.tyrannical.org> on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @01:15PM (#16308085) Homepage
      gmail also has a hosted solution. you sign up, point your dns to gmail's mail servers, and can have all your email go through email. You can even create accounts, mailing lists, etc. Right now they appear to be limiting me to 25 users per domain. Works really well. you can pop3 off their system too.
  • by kindbud (90044) on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @12:06PM (#16306889) Homepage
    Sourceforge is posting the following message to bug reports about this problem.

    Greetings,
        We're aware of the difficulties in the interaction
    between
    our mailing list services and Gmail. Our network operations
    team
    is currently aware of the issue and is working with Gmail
    administration on a resolution.

    -Jay Bonci
    Systems Programmer Analyst,
    Sourceforge.net


    Somebody posted a SMTP dialog to one of the bug reports:

    Example:
    telnet mail.sourceforge.net 25
    Trying 66.35.250.206...
    Connected to mail.sourceforge.net.
    Escape character is '^]'.
    220 mail.sourceforge.net ESMTP Exim 4.44 Sat, 30 Sep
    2006 01:12:02 -0700 sc8-sf-mx1.sourceforge.net
    HELO aisa.fi.muni.cz
    250 mail.sourceforge.net Hello 14397 at aisa.fi.muni.cz [147.251.48.1]
    mail from:
    250 OK
    rcpt to:
    451-Could not complete sender verify callout
    451-Could not complete sender verify callout for <anyone@gmail.com>
    451-The mail server(s) for the domain may be temporarily unreachable, or
    451-they may be permanently unreachable from this server. In the latter case,
    451-you need to change the address or create an MX record for its domain
    451-if it is supposed to be generally accessible from the Internet.
    451 Talk to your mail administrator for details.
    QUIT
    221 mail.sourceforge.net closing connection
    Connection closed by foreign host.


    Sourceforge's mail server is doing a callback to gmail.com, to verify the sender address is accepted by gmail.com. This check is screwing up. It's Sourceforge's problem. Callback verify is not covered by any RFC, so SF has gone above and beyond the standards, it is their responsibility to make sure their SMTP service is interoperable with standard servers, not the other way around. Google can provide logs of the failed callbacks, but that's all the burden they should assume. It's SF's problem to fix.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by kindbud (90044)
      Oops, some angle brackets got munched by the parser because I forgot to HTML-ise them.


      mail from: <anyone@gmail.com>
      250 OK
      rcpt to: <firebird-net-provider@lists.sourceforge.net>
      451-Could not complete sender verify callout
      451-Could not complete sender verify callout for <anyone@gmail.com>
      451-The mail server(s) for the domain may be temporarily unreachable, or
      451-they may be permanently unreachable from this server. In the latter case,
      451-you need to change the address or create an MX record f
    • by pe1chl (90186) on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @12:23PM (#16307177)
      Callback verify is not covered by any RFC

      On the other hand, there is nothing in any RFC that prohibits you from doing callbacks.

      Unfortunately the above post misses critical information about the callback itself. What mail address is it using as a source?
      Usually, callbacks use "MAIL FROM:<>" and the RFCs explicitly state that you MUST accept this. But, some mailservers reject mail from <>. That could be a problem, but in this case the problem is in the called server that does not implement a MUST item.

      The mailserver I manage at work uses callbacks. It almost never causes problems. In cases where the sending server refuses MAIL FROM:<> it tries to use MAIL FROM:<mailer-daemon@domain>.
      The only known problem occurs when the called server first accepts MAIL FROM:<> and then rejects the RCPT TO: with an error referring back to the <> source.
      This is done by the broken "Spamfilter for ISP" by LOGSAT. But this one has other SMTP protocol bugs, so just don't use it.

      And then of course there are some mailinglists that simply send their mail from a nonexistant address. Presumably to avoid having to do list maintenance.
      I consider this antisocial, and have no problem with blocking their mail.
    • by davecb (6526) *

      They are probably doing a VRFY <person@place> on another connection, which is part of the RFCs, but which is often turned off by MTAs.

      Back in the dusty beginnings of time when I was working on mail, the same MTAs that turned off VRFY always said they'd accept RCPT To:<person@place>, so as to be able to avoid any microsecond-consuming checking (;-))

      --dave

      • by cmdrbuzz (681767)
        Probably not using VRFY, more likely HELO, MAIL FROM:<>, RCPT TO: <your@email.com>, QUIT.

        We use the response to the RCPT TO: as verification if the email address is valid.
        As no data is sent, the receiving server should abandon the message.
  • Sourceforge has been blocking my email for ages, from the biggest ISP of the country no less. This of course is on a whole different level (small country :-), but doesn't surprise me.
  • by rasjani (97395) on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @01:18PM (#16308129) Homepage
    While i understand that this post will be read by noone because im not writing this to the topic thats still hot, i'd like to share my experiences. *Gmail* Looses Forwarded Mails. Sometimes. I have my domain thats *now* being hosted in gmail. At one point when my domain was not in use due to outtake on my internet connection, i started to use regular gmail xyz.zxy@gmail.com, about 6 months later, my domain was "accepted" to the beta phase of gmail for your own domains. As i was allready so used to that account and had all my calendar there, i just forward all my mail from my own domain to regular gmail account - and *alot* of messages never reach from One gmail account (hosted) to Another Gmail account (normal gmail). All the messages are visible ofcourse where they first come into the system but they are never delivered to the main account where im supposed to read'em.
  • IT'S FIXED!!! (Score:3, Informative)

    by SiliconEntity (448450) on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @01:27PM (#16308293)
    Emails I sent a few days ago have now appeared on the SF.NET mailing lists, as of this morning! So it appears that the problem is fixed, or at least that one of the many workarounds that have been suggested have been applied (like temporarily disabling callbacks).

    This problem has been going on for a whole week, and now the very morning that this complaint appears on slashdot is the same morning that the problem is fixed. Coincidence? Or is it that the impending publicity motivated someone to reprioritize this problem and do something about it? It's shameful that Sourceforge allowed a communications failure to persist for so long from what is undoubtedly one of their biggest email sources.

    In any case I'm very happy that it seems to be working again. Are other gmail users seeing similar improvements?
  • by Paralizer (792155) on Wednesday October 04, 2006 @02:17PM (#16309189) Homepage
    I've setup my SF preferences to forward messages from @users.sourceforge.net to my gmail account. Since I've signed up for gmail, none of the messages sent to my sf address have been received. I always meant to put in a ticket at SF, but never really considered it a big deal, I would just direct people to email my gmail account directly.

Imitation is the sincerest form of plagarism.

Working...