From lurker-index@localhost Fri Sep 23 17:44:26 2016 Return-Path: Received: from lin16.mojsite.com (178.218.164.164:993) by g0n.xdwgrp with IMAP4-SSL; 23 Sep 2016 15:44:26 -0000 Envelope-to: miro.rovis@croatiafidelis.hr Delivery-date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 17:02:44 +0200 Received: from shtjevan.gbnet.net ([194.70.142.36]:50297 helo=gbnet.net) by lin16.mojsite.com with esmtps (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1bnRzo-00049i-Gl for miro.rovis@croatiafidelis.hr; Fri, 23 Sep 2016 17:02:36 +0200 Received: (qmail 10486 invoked by uid 611); 23 Sep 2016 14:59:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 10410 invoked from network); 23 Sep 2016 14:58:59 -0000 Received: from mail-1.fido.net (84.246.192.5) by shtjevan.gbnet.net with ESMTPS (DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted); 23 Sep 2016 14:58:59 -0000 Received: from remy.darac.org.uk ([2a02:8010:d008::c0ff:ee:1]) by mail-1.fido.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1bnRwG-0001Aq-Q7 for mutt-users@mutt.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2016 15:58:59 +0100 Received: from darac.org.uk (remy.darac.org.uk [IPv6:2a02:8010:d008::c0ff:ee:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: mailinglist@darac.org.uk) by remy.darac.org.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3sgc1w3C84z1DnNg for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2016 15:58:44 +0100 (BST) Authentication-Results: remy.darac.org.uk; dmarc=none header.from=darac.org.uk DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=darac.org.uk; s=remy; t=1474642724; bh=ukF19OUczc2J223RE9+lSl5HheSSwTpNJjgguZhsz6c=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=eoiv5CgiBLR192CnpiMLROSQTP7Wb93eYW0oh8Dl4vlVlWzsU9LEEjgOs4VkReDNo 1ysi3glXtRU6xfG0xPYb1egyMSBIXjFMQYxAIKk3fQ485weJMgY/M12AbjwkOgC9fc w5we/yWbbgtRrO0hfPZNEd5X6mMKNA7iZiO1KuUw= Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 15:58:44 +0100 From: Darac Marjal To: mutt-users@mutt.org Subject: Re: how to verify emails from web Message-ID: <20160923145843.vggllbhn6ju3eh4b@darac.org.uk> References: <20160923133234.GA9244@g0n.xdwgrp> <20160923143904.GB9244@g0n.xdwgrp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="mznydxlq7tp7bzgw" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160923143904.GB9244@g0n.xdwgrp> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20160910 (1.7.0) Received-SPF: pass (mail-1.fido.net: domain of darac.org.uk designates 2a02:8010:d008::c0ff:ee:1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2a02:8010:d008::c0ff:ee:1; envelope-from=mailinglist@darac.org.uk; helo=remy.darac.org.uk; X-SPF-Result: mail-1.fido.net: domain of darac.org.uk designates 2a02:8010:d008::c0ff:ee:1 as permitted sender Authentication-Results: mail-1.fido.net; dmarc=pass header.from=darac.org.uk X-Filter-ID: s0sct1PQhAABKnZB5plbIbTSR2woCITk/yztIq5djRuQvkYbc3zxg0+nX4S6MMyEls3tay73RXxG SkOQvNIxiUCszxVmc6NigDf/8WdM90AU+3qH/70FV04QTNW73XA4hhMEiEzR31cCOXB+hjb2jMN4 oRehxgl9bj0jXrHJr6+lwnJzFBlAMXFBONoc/l6SJXIjofFMHHzmjhBR4+1Ghp+HA2r3xumR3TXA iwd1D4ieQ539bOwNRhTHz6u0AqEDIbtf63VNbf0lrvssY+k7AIu24eYQm5fImcjAXnXkJz4M+D8t 6wTgNUiDWF1kxmRYPd0rEuGjFyZoidhtHm+WoX8t+kNMuP2SBKWfPEGMGd3YfZP+/ns0iJCr7ogp kzDvocpNdByEo0rjCJyzExkD8LX5CYaISugMI/NGuKXOJtneNHk15VolAGHS5rCXQKDy/spXMy7P sCHNKMVg1bvmya+a50kq913R7GVFKmsEITT1jrFMWSYPA2CXN58ytBIYQEo5+EnkMOOMAzuMnCHv Ka7U25OUkChc89La5MsdjsSM3ugML4Qf4Njw6f206hO/LApgdEEfu1a76F+Css7UQw== X-Report-Abuse-To: spam@master.fido.net Authentication-Results: fido.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mailinglist@darac.org.uk Authentication-Results: fido.net; dkim=pass header.i=darac.org.uk X-FidoGuard-Class: ham X-FidoGuard-Evidence: Combined (0.08) X-Recommended-Action: accept List-Post: List-Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@mutt.org, body only "unsubscribe mutt-users" Precedence: bulk Sender: owner-mutt-users@mutt.org X-PlusHosting-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-PlusHosting-MailScanner-ID: 1bnRzo-00049i-Gl X-PlusHosting-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-PlusHosting-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-6.649, required 5, autolearn=not spam, BAYES_00 -5.00, DKIM_SIGNED 0.10, DKIM_VALID -0.10, DKIM_VALID_AU -0.10, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS 0.00, KAM_INFOUSMEBIZ 0.75, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.30) X-PlusHosting-MailScanner-From: owner-mutt-users-m24792@mutt.org X-Spam-Status: No X-getmail-retrieved-from-mailbox: =?utf-8?q?INBOX?= --mznydxlq7tp7bzgw Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 04:39:04PM +0200, Miroslav Rovis wrote: >Sure I forgot the... [see below] > >On 160923-15:32+0200, Miroslav Rovis wrote: > >> http://marc.info/?l=3Dmutt-users&m=3D147448664132307&w=3D2 >> but for clarity I'll attach the same file here as ClausAssmann.tar > >ClausAssmann.tar attached to this email. > >--- >A digression, don't read below if you don't have the time to. > >However, I'm curious, if at all this is possible (time on an eventual >reader who would respond) to know why I got my own mail back (to be able >to send this errata) only after some 55 minutes. Check the Received: headers in your message to see what took so long. =20 Here are the headers as I got them, with some extraneous lines removed: Delivered-To: mailinglist@darac.org.uk Received: from remy.darac.org.uk by remy.darac.org.uk (Dovecot) with LMTP id ENyWHX875VcGIAAAjhN3oQ for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2016 15:26:07 +0100 Received: from gbnet.net (shtjevan.gbnet.net [194.70.142.36]) by remy.darac.org.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3sgbHy6ZZKz1DnNg for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2016 15:25:50 +0100 (BST) Received: (qmail 1887 invoked by uid 611); 23 Sep 2016 14:21:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 1792 invoked from network); 23 Sep 2016 14:20:37 -0000 Received: from davin.gbnet.net (194.70.142.37) by shtjevan.gbnet.net with ESMTPS (DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted); 23 Sep = 2016 14:20:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 22684 invoked from network); 23 Sep 2016 14:02:36 -0000 Received: from mail-1.fido.net (84.246.192.5) by davin.gbnet.net with ESMTPS (DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted); 23 Sep 201= 6 14:02:36 -0000 Received: from alt1.smtp6.plusvps.com ([89.201.164.169]) by mail-1.fido.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) for mutt-users@mutt.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2016 15:02:35 +0100 Received: from lin16.mojsite.com ([178.218.164.164]) by smtp6.plusvps.com with esmtps (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) for mutt-users@mutt.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2016 16:02:22 +0200 Received: from 78-0-197-250.adsl.net.t-com.hr ([78.0.197.250]:58204 helo=3D= g0n.localdomain) by lin16.mojsite.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) for mutt-users@mutt.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2016 15:32:18 +0200 Received: by g0n.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id F373B43; Fri, 23 Sep 2016 15:32:34 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 15:32:34 +0200 The Received: headers are prepended to the list, so we read it=20 Twitter-style (i.e. bottom to top). You composed the message at 15:32. =20 Very quickly it passed to lin15.mojsite.com. However, it then waited=20 there until 16:02 before being passed to smtp6.plusvps.com. The next=20 major delay is within gbnet.net. davin.gbnet.net receives the message at=20 14:02 (16:02 your time), but only passes it to shtjevan.gbnet.net at=20 14:20 (16:20 your time). The final delay comes when gbnet.net is=20 delivering the message to my server, and for that, we can assume this is=20 the time taken for the mailing list software to send the message to=20 multiple recipients. > >Repeating: 55 minutes it took me (tried multiple times, as I realized >pretty quickly that I forgot the attachment, and tried right away to get >my own mail from mutt-users and send this attachment. > >How fast was in the case of this previous email of mine the Marc.info >archive, and was it due to it being slow or was it due to my provider, >whom I have beef with, decided to molest me again >(see http://www.croatiafidelis.hr/cenz/iskon-tcom-mr/ for a little on >that) >? > >I also checked the pages: >http://marc.info/?l=3Dmutt-users&r=3D1&b=3D201609&w=3D2 >and that previous email of mine really didn't show for about the same 55 >minutes, which I know perfectly can be because of the same page being >kept in cache at the providers and not being renewed. > >Thanks if anybody replies. (Pls. don't count for certain that I would >receive your private email, they often just don't send those if they >know I wouldn't be able to know about them and/or wouldn't be able to proof >anything.) >--=20 >Miroslav Rovis >Zagreb, Croatia >http://www.CroatiaFidelis.hr --=20 For more information, please reread. --mznydxlq7tp7bzgw Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQJTBAABCgA9BQJX5UMcNhSAAAAAABUAGHBrYS1hZGRyZXNzQGdudXBnLm9yZ21h aWxpbmdsaXN0QGRhcmFjLm9yZy51awAKCRDm6eQlSMkS55a5D/wNHXopNqUWJsCW sMAJhQKgZnI1LGOyZqzoOgauquXmSCzpb/s+sU/itM6Z/9bzpPa0Y26K9IPnsgGY XD82i1xMfTVIEtsrdBZAOZfT1qfR//jVFS1+2rs7dbP0QGwPGCXL4o1w9fLs3moO h7Oa3TgxPw98d+ZJ0fwCbATYsXCkInsner/aQVb+mEkfiG2Hl7wC4k/vSwaw4K1h Eql67rWbJNujLN/2+F1StE1jCG3vVOA7ECbKau2aJPfV90zFS/9XpQpp3hVBbOmv AhCAsxr2zI8y5mWgV6uVr3PxGy37/wEfdclvMm5AhndqtGqggTMieXxry5bkopc4 xEZIXx+0HLld6rsnU/iUvf9vWOA36gi0NNmKnG3BBBxUovzfk0JCv+Fb+X6p8I3L R2cLpVydYLCBdnsx4EXjAMkvo9Ytc5Viv7kqnYkfYgOzMX5LJBOSSUS66Kx11jOG j/nb5MeBGUdmvzdhFoFCwH+94/9mm0nOJSiVYRTJU1jygSLxWkPe7muGLso7nA9O cqgKYdcpjx0l9kNkj3JfG0egkeHVcAdVO2qV2JUO3qIsTuEjKap6pJ5QShHoZNVh nHvMGzOjenZUov98mkkzUuAImE6Cdm9o80G08Gtk2tV9JbXOXdUuUps/8EJBr1YT FVc3O/ummKmEByZShlMBzhiA88PSIQ== =WFXC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --mznydxlq7tp7bzgw--