Invasivesmooth cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora Loisel) eradication is important for the health of many coastal ecosystems.An integrated regime of continuous submergence after clear mowing, with three interval levels between mowing and submergence (5, 10, and 15 d) and three submergence depths (20, 30, and 50 cm), was implemented in cofferdams enclosing Response codes Each SMTP call you make returns a response. 200 responses are usually success responses, and 400 responses are usually deferrals. SendGrid continues to retry resending 400 messages for up to 72 hours. 500 responses are hard failures that are not retried by our servers. This table has possible response codes with example errors and a general explanation of that sort of response. Error Message Explanation 250 `Queued mail for delivery` Your mail has been successfully queued! This response indicates that the recipient server has accepted the message. 403 `You are not authorized to send from that email address` This means the "from" address does not match a verified Sender Identity. Mail cannot be sent until this error is resolved. To learn how to resolve this error, see our [Sender Identity requirements]for-developers/sending-email/sender-identity/. 421 `Message from temporarily deferred` Messages are temporarily deferred because of recipient server policy - often it's because of too many messages or connections in too short of a timeframe. We continue to retry deferred messages for up to 72 hours. Consider temporarily sending less messages to a domain that is returning this code because this could further delay your messages currently being tried. 450 `too frequent connects from please try again later.` The message failed because the recipient's mailbox was unavailable, perhaps because it was locked or was not routable at the time. We continue to retry messages for up to 72 hours. Consider temporarily sending less messages to a domain that is returning this code because this could further delay your messages currently being tried. 451 `Temporary local problem - please try later` The message simply failed, usually due to a far-end server error. We continue to retry messages for up to 72 hours. 451 `Authentication failed Maximum credits exceeded` There is a credit limit of emails per day enforced in error. Contact support to remove that limit. 452 `Too many recipients received this hour throttled` The message has been deferred due to insufficient system storage. We continue to retry messages for up to 72 hours. 550 `Requested action not taken mailbox unavailable` The user’s mailbox was unavailable. Usually because it could not be found, or because of incoming policy reasons. Remove these address from your list - it is likely a fake, or it was mistyped. 551 `User does not exist.` The intended mailbox does not exist on this recipient server. Remove these addresses from your list. 552 `This message is larger than the current system limit or the recipient’s mailbox is full. Create a shorter message body or remove attachments and try sending it again.` The recipients mailbox has exceeded its storage limits. We don't resend messages with this error code because this is usually a sign this is an abandoned email. 553 `Invalid/inactive user.` The message was refused because the mailbox name is either malformed or does not exist. Remove these addresses from your list. 554 `ERROR Mail refused` This is a default response that can be caused by a lot of issues. There is often a human readable portion of this error that gives more detailed information, but if not, remove these addresses from your list. Other `Delayed Bounce - Unable to Parse Server Reason` This is what SendGrid displays when the reciepients server returns a blank reason code. Turning off click tracking To turn off click tracking, add this to your X-SMTPAPI header { "filters" { "clicktrack" { "settings" { "enable" 0 } } } } Invalid SMTP API header When you try to send an invalid X-SMTPAPI header, you will get an email with details about the invalidations. You may also see errors on your Email Activity page or in your Event Webhook data. If this happens, the email should give you the information you need to begin troubleshooting. We also recommend uploading your JSON into a JSON validator, because this is often an invalid JSON issue. Certificate verification failed for "certificate verification failed for [ untrusted issuer /C=US/O=The Go Daddy Group, Inc./OU=Go Daddy Class 2 Certification Authority" If you receive this error, the connection is still encrypted; it's just that your server doesn't have the necessary CA certificate authority certificates to confirm that our certificate is valid. To update your certificates Download the GoDaddy CA bundle from grab the one called " Save that on your server. Tell Postfix where to find it by adding or editing the following line in /etc/postfix/ "smtp_tls_CAfile = /etc/postfix/ssl/ Restart Postfix to make the change take effect. If the mail server communicates with more than just us, add this certificate to your existing CA bundle frequently called 550 Unauthenticated Senders Not Allowed If you’re getting an “Unauthenticated Senders Not Allowed” error, the problem usually lies in authenticating with our SMTP server. This error gets triggered when there was an attempt to hand over an email message through before authenticating the connection with your SendGrid username and API key. To fix this issue, you’ll want to make sure that you’ve configured your setup to connect to using authentication, and that the credentials you’re using are your SendGrid username and a properly configured API key as the password. For more on API keys, see API Keys. If you’re using cPanel/Exim, you’ll want to make sure it’s configured to authenticate every time it connects to Additional Resources Weirdoffice 365 email failure message. Posted by Daniel9483 on Dec 8th, 2017 at 8:31 AM. Microsoft Office 365 Microsoft Exchange. I have an automated email, which gets Sol–Gel Product News Published 05 June 2008 Journal of Sol-Gel Science and Technology volume 47, pages 203–236 2008Cite this article 4143 Accesses 69 Citations 9 Altmetric Metrics details Access options Buy single article Instant access to the full article PDF. 39,95 € Price includes VAT Ukraine NotesThe coefficient of friction was determined using an Implant Sciences Corporation ISC-200 pin-on-disc Tribometer using a rubber pin with 40 mm2 contact area and 250 g static load on the pin. The pin was immersed in water during the test and the tested specimen rotated under the pin. As the measured coefficient of friction was observed to change generally a decrease with increasing number of rotations, the results in Fig. 1 were obtained by conditioning the samples through measurement over 10,000 rotations, rinsing the samples and pin with water then measuring the coefficient of friction of these conditioned safe level of static coefficient of friction is indicated as at least according to the standard ASTM D 2047, “Standard Test Method for Static Coefficient of Friction of Polish-Coated Floor Surfaces as Measured by the James Machine”, ASTM InternationalThe light transmittance was measured by a Shimadzu UV-3101PC spectrophotometer. The samples were 1 mm thick glass microscope slides both coated and uncoated.Author informationAuthor notesM. A. AegerterPresent address , Ch. des Placettes, 6, 1041, Bottens, SwitzerlandAuthors and AffiliationsFormer at Leibniz-Institut fuer Neue Materialien–INM, 66123, Saarbruecken, GermanyM. A. AegerterInstituto Superior Técnico, 1049-001, Lisboa, PortugalR. AlmeidaSingapore Institute of Manufacturing Technology-SIMTech, Singapore, SingaporeA. SoutarOsaka Prefecture University, 599-8531, Osaka, JapanK. TadanagaZheijang University, 310027, Hangshou, ChinaH. YangUniversity of Tokyo, 153-8904, Tokyo, JapanT. WatanabeAuthorsM. A. AegerterYou can also search for this author in PubMed Google ScholarR. AlmeidaYou can also search for this author in PubMed Google ScholarA. SoutarYou can also search for this author in PubMed Google ScholarK. TadanagaYou can also search for this author in PubMed Google ScholarH. YangYou can also search for this author in PubMed Google ScholarT. WatanabeYou can also search for this author in PubMed Google ScholarCorresponding authorCorrespondence to M. A. and permissionsAbout this articleCite this articleAegerter, Almeida, R., Soutar, A. et al. Coatings made by sol–gel and chemical nanotechnology. J Sol-Gel Sci Technol 47, 203–236 2008. citationReceived 04 June 2007Accepted 25 April 2008Published 05 June 2008Issue Date August 2008DOI FilmMgF2Colloidal SiO2Technical Research Laboratory

WebBrowser Information — IMPORTANT information for Windows XP users.. Brokerage Products: Not FDIC Insured • No Bank Guarantee • May Lose Value. Not all products and services listed are available outside the U.S. and some are subject to country specific restrictions.

Peonies Home Shop Perennials Shop by Type Peonies Compare Compare Compare Compare Compare Compare Compare Compare Compare Compare Compare Compare Peonies Peonies are perennial garden classics, loved throughout the world for their extravagant, early summer blossoms. They are easy, reliable and will bloom for generations with little or no attention. As cut flowers, peonies have an elegant natural beauty and a delicate, unforgettable perfume. Imusing this hdd with a Eagle Tech ET-CS2MSU2-BK 2.5-Inch SATA to USB Portable HDD Enclosure (Mesh) to store movies and play on a NETGEAR NeoTV 550 NTV550 Ultimate HD Media Player no issues at all, the drive is fast for 5400rpm drive (I got 60-80 mg/s on esata dock, on usb2 around 30 mg/s), it can be driven by the usb port fine (no need for dual usb), the drive Journal List Wiley-Blackwell Online Open PMC4499260 Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2014 Aug 25; 5335 9251–9256. Jesper J H B Sattler, Ines D Gonzalez-Jimenez, Lin Luo,* Brien A Stears, Andrzej Malek, David G Barton, Beata A Kilos, Mark P Kaminsky, Tiny W G M Verhoeven, Eline J Koers, Marc Baldus, and Bert M Weckhuysen*AbstractA novel catalyst material for the selective dehydrogenation of propane is presented. The catalyst consists of 1000 ppm Pt, 3 wt % Ga, and wt % K supported on alumina. We observed a synergy between Ga and Pt, resulting in a highly active and stable catalyst. Additionally, we propose a bifunctional active phase, in which coordinately unsaturated Ga3+ species are the active species and where Pt functions as a gallium oxide, heterogeneous catalysis, platinum, propane dehydrogenation, synergistic effectsThe recent exploration and production of hydrocarbons from shale basins in the USA such as in Barnett, Marcellus, Haynesville, and Eagle Ford, has led to a rebound in its energy competitiveness. Currently, the USA is at the lowest level of crude oil imports in 25 years.[1] While oil production has greatly increased in these shale plays, natural gas has increased even more significantly, with the Energy Information Agency projecting that by 2040, 50 % of the natural gas production within the USA will come from shale.[2] This new source of hydrocarbons has the potential to impact the worldwide supply of natural gas, because shale formations are found throughout the world. A recent study estimates that there are 207 trillion cubic meters of technically recoverable shale gas globally. China is estimated to have the world’s largest reserves in shale at 32 trillion cubic meters.[3] Although most shale gas outside of the USA is not currently produced, it is reasonable to expect that these low-cost feedstocks for chemicals and fuels production will become available worldwide. These developments will without a doubt impose significant technical and economic challenges and opportunities on the chemical industry as a substantial amounts of heavier paraffins, such as propane are obtained from shale gas deposits, there is a vast and growing interest in utilizing propane dehydrogenation PDH technologies for the on purpose production of propene.[4] Within this context, it is important to mention that there have been five newly announced PDH units in the USA, while 9 to 17 PDH units may be built in China.[5] The majority of these projects is based on one of the two primary existing technologies for PDH; the Oleflex process from UOP and the CATOFIN process from CB&I Lummus.[6] Although substantial improvements in catalyst materials Pt-Sn/Al2O3 for Oleflex and Cr/Al2O3 for CATOFIN and process conditions have been made for both technologies, challenges related to their activity, stability, and selectivity still have to be we present a new family of very stable, active, and selective catalyst materials for the dehydrogenation of propane to propene based on Pt–Ga/Al2O3. A few papers have already been published, in which Pt and Ga were combined to produce PDH catalysts, but in these systems Ga is deemed to function as a promoter element, with Pt being the active dehydrogenation element.[7] This is in contrast with our current catalyst, in which Pt is present in minute amounts and Ga is the active dehydrogenation element. A clear synergistic effect is observed between both components, which results in a very stable catalyst material that is highly resistant to deactivation, by perform a systematic study, a series of nine catalyst materials was prepared by depositing 1000 ppm Pt, or 3 wt % Ga, and wt % K on an alumina support. Details of the catalyst characterization X-ray diffraction XRD, transmission electron microscopy energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy TEM-EDX, and N2-physisorption are given in the Supporting Information Figures S1 and S2, and Table S1. From these characterization data it is concluded that all the compounds are homogeneously and highly dispersed on the catalyst materials as there is no evidence for the presence of crystalline catalytic performance of the prepared materials has been tested in a lab-scale reactor for eight successive dehydrogenation–regeneration cycles. Each cycle consists of a 15 min PDH step at 620 °C, followed by a treatment in air at 750 °C for 30 min. The reactor is flushed with He between these steps. The resultant gas stream is analyzed by gas chromatography as described in the Supporting Information Figure S3. The setup also allows for the use of operando Raman and UV/Vis spectroscopy to track the deposition of coke on the catalyst materials.[8] A complete list of the catalysts prepared and their respective activity and selectivity data for the first, second, and eighth PDH cycle is summarized in Table 1. Additionally, Figure 1 shows a comparison between the conversion and selectivity obtained during the first eight cycles for the bare Al2O3 support, Pt, 3Ga, Pt3Ga, and Pt3GaK catalyst of propane X, green and selectivity S, blue for propene during PDH on the Al2O3 support, Pt, 3Ga, Pt3Ga, and Pt3GaK catalysts for each of the eight successive dehydrogenation cycles. The exact values of X and S for the first, second, and eighth cycle are summarized in Table 1. Evidently, both Pt and Ga are required to obtain a highly active selective and stable propane dehydrogenation 1The conversion X and selectivity S obtained halfway through the first, second, and eighth cycle of the ten catalyst materials under investigation.[a]Catalyst material supported on Al2O3CodeFirst cycleSecond cycleEighth cycleCoke dep[b]Darkening[c]D/G[d]X [%]S [%]X [%]S [%]X [%]S [%]wt %[%]−1000 ppm Pt, wt % Ga, wt % ppm Pt, 3 wt % Ga, wt % ppm Pt, wt % ppm Pt, 3 wt % wt % Ga, wt % wt % Ga, wt % wt % wt % ppm Table 1 and Figure 1, it can be concluded that the catalytic conversion varies strongly between the different catalyst materials. In case of the catalysts containing both Pt and Ga, this value is close to the equilibrium conversion which is ca. 55 % at 620 °C and 1 atm pressure for the first dehydrogenation cycle. When Pt is absent, the conversion is roughly halved, while the absence of Ga results in an even greater drop in conversion. At the same time, the selectivity is high for all catalysts containing both Pt and Ga, but decreases for the materials containing only Pt or Ga. This implies a synergy between Pt and Ga that results in a highly active and selective catalyst. Alkali metal dopants, such as K, are known to increase the propene selectivity and decrease coke deposition by poisoning the Brønsted acid sites present in the PDH catalysts.[9] Indeed, a slight increase is observed in propene selectivity after addition of K to the Pt and Ga containing catalysts. Finally, the bare support displays a very low activity and selectivity and is therefore regarded to be inactive. After the first PDH cycle, the conversion and selectivity of the catalysts does not drop, verifying that the catalysts are not deactivated. In fact, for the GaK, Ga, and 3Ga catalysts, the propane conversion even increases. This implies that these catalysts require an activation period, related to the exposure to oxygen at 750 °C. Indeed, by treating the catalyst with oxygen at 750 °C prior to the first propane dehydrogenation cycle, the conversion is increased from to % for the GaK catalyst. Treating the GaK catalyst at 620 °C under air prior to reaction has a lower impact and the conversion is only % for the first propane dehydrogenation cycle. Apparently, the high temperature during the regeneration is required for the Ga to remain active in the PDH the eighth cycle, the values of propane conversion and propene selectivity have dropped for all catalysts. The deactivation is the least severe for those catalysts containing both Pt and Ga. It is known that Pt-based dehydrogenation catalysts deactivate due to sintering of the metal nanoparticles, an effect provoked by the harsh conditions of the dehydrogenation reaction.[10] Therefore, it is surprising that even though the dehydrogenation and oxidation are performed at relatively high temperatures in this study, no such deactivation is observed for the PtGa catalysts the synergy between the Pt and Ga remains as these materials continue to outperform their analogues, which solely contain addition to the catalytic tests discussed in Figure 1 and Table 1, a long-term stability test consisting of approximately 150 cycles or 14 days of operation, was performed on the very active Pt3GaK catalyst. The catalytic performance of the catalyst during this experiment is shown in Figure 2. It was found that the PDH activity drops significantly during the first two days of testing, after which the catalyst performance remained stable during a twelve-day evaluation period, giving a propane conversion of % and a selectivity for propene of %, stressing the high stability of the catalyst stability experiment with the Pt3GaK catalyst, which was cycled for ca. 150 times over a 14 day period. During the first two days both the conversion and selectivity drop, after which the catalyst performance remains stable for 12 days on Raman and UV/Vis spectra have been collected during the catalytic dehydrogenation experiments and the results are summarized in Table 1. From the UV/Vis spectra Figure S4, it is concluded that the absorption increases during the first minutes on stream for the PtGaK catalyst, after which the spectra do not change anymore. In the absence of K PtGa, the darkening is a more gradual process that continues throughout the cycle. To compare the relative darkening of the different catalyst materials, an arbitrary darkening scale was designed, where 0 % darkening represented a pristine white catalyst, and 100 % darkening a completely coked catalyst, for which we used carbon nanofibers as the reference material. As Table 1 shows, the presence of K results in less darkening of the catalyst material, due to less coke being deposited. For each of the eight propane dehydrogenation cycles, a similar level of catalyst darkening is observed for all materials under Figure 3, the operando Raman spectra obtained at the end of the eighth propane dehydrogenation cycle are shown for the different investigated catalysts. Two Raman bands typical of coke are observed the so-called D disordered, at 1320 cm−1 and G band graphitic coke, at 1590 cm−1. Specific information about the nature of the coke deposits formed on the catalyst surface can be obtained from the ratio of these two Raman bands.[11] Interestingly, the presence of Pt in the catalyst material has a significant effect on the D/G ratio. In Figure 3 the lighter colored spectra represent the coke formed on Pt-containing catalysts, whereas the darker colored spectra represent the coke on their non-Pt-containing counterparts. As the Raman spectra are normalized to the G band, it is clear that the D band is more intense for the catalyst materials that do not contain Pt. When looking at the D/G ratio shown in Table 1, the catalyst materials that contain Pt and Ga have a D/G ratio of around while catalyst materials that do not have Pt in their composition have a D/G ratio of approximately A possible explanation is that Pt further dehydrogenates the carbon deposits, leading to a higher graphitic portion in the coke. However, it should be noted that the coke deposited on the support also has a D/G ratio of Similar values for the D/G ratios are obtained from the first dehydrogenation cycle, showing that the nature of the coke deposits does not Raman spectra obtained during the eighth propane dehydrogenation cycle for the different catalyst materials under investigation. The spectra are normalized with respect to the G band at 1600 cm−1. The lighter colored Raman spectra are for the Pt-containing catalysts; the darker spectra of their non-Pt-containing the eighth cycle, the catalyst materials were not regenerated, but instead collected from the reactor and analyzed by thermogravimetric analysis TGA combined with on-line mass spectrometry MS to investigate the coke deposits formed. The change of weight per temperature interval as a function of temperature is shown in Figure S5. In addition, during the combustion a distinct CO2 profile is observed for each catalyst by on-line MS analysis, which is shown in Figure S6. These profiles accurately describe the temperature where coke is combusted, which is between 300–650 °C; the weight loss corresponding with this temperature interval is included in Table 1. The amount of CO2 detected is very small for the catalyst containing only Pt, for the bare support, and for the catalysts containing K. Less coke is therefore deposited on these catalysts, in agreement with what was observed with operando UV/Vis spectroscopy. On the other hand, the absence of K and the presence of Ga results in significant amounts of coke on the catalyst surface. As Brønsted acidity is associated with the deposition of coke, the presence of GaOx may introduce acidity to the catalyst surface, resulting in catalyst coking. When K is present on the catalyst, these sites are poisoned, inhibiting the formation of coke. Note that this implies that almost no acidity is present on the bare support to start specific nature of the gallium species present on the catalyst was investigated by collecting 71Ga MAS NMR magic-angle spinning NMR and XPS X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy spectra of the fresh Pt3Ga and 3Ga catalysts Figure 4, Figure S7, and Table 2. In the NMR spectra, two peaks with chemical shifts of 151 and 15 ppm are observed relative to the signal of GaNO33, corresponding to tetrahedrally IV and octahedrally VI coordinated Ga3+, respectively.[12] The spectra show a strong resemblance to 71Ga MAS NMR spectra of a ternary oxide composed of Ga, Al, and O, as reported by Chen et al.[13] Such a mixed oxide is likely formed during the high temperatures 750 °C of the calcination step after impregnation. Chen et al. proposed that a spinel structure is formed, in which Ga3+ is preferentially located in a tetrahedral coordination. Such a tetrahedral preference of Ga3+ has been reported for several mixed oxides containing Ga and is explained by a covalent contribution to the metal oxygen bond caused by the so-called d-block contraction. As the d-orbital becomes completely filled, it ineffectively shields the nuclear charge, resulting in a higher polarization MAS NMR spectra of the fresh Pt3Ga red and 3Ga blue catalyst materials. Asterisks denote the spinning 2Chemical composition of the surface of the 3Ga and Pt3Ga catalysts as measured by XPS.[a]CatalystAl wt %O wt %Ga wt %Pt wt % measurements on the fresh samples of the Pt3Ga and 3Ga catalysts showed that only Ga3+ is present and that the concentration of Ga on the surface is only marginally higher as compared to the catalyst as a whole Table 2; wt % observed versus 3 wt %. This indicates that a significant amount of Ga is incorporated in the bulk of the support, which confirms the observation made by NMR that a mixed Al2O3–Ga2O3 oxide is formed. On the contrary, the apparent concentration of Pt is high on the surface wt % observed versus 1000 ppm, suggesting that the Pt is well dispersed on the surface. Furthermore, the presence of Pt appears to affect the distribution of Ga on the catalyst material. First of all, the concentration of Ga on the catalyst surface is higher for the Pt3Ga catalyst compared to the 3Ga catalyst wt % versus wt %. Secondly, from the 71Ga MAS NMR spectra of these two catalysts Figure 4, it is observed that a larger amount of tetrahedrally coordinated Ga3+ is present in Pt3Ga compared to the 3Ga catalyst. This suggests that the presence of Pt results in a more tetrahedral Ga3+ species on the catalyst surface. The respective XPS spectra are discussed in more detail in the Supporting Information Figure S7.Because metallic Ga is a liquid and Ga2O a volatile compound, it is important to consider the reducibility of Ga3+, especially because the dehydrogenation reaction is performed at high temperatures in a reducing atmosphere. Alternatively, a Pt–Ga alloy may be formed by hydrogen spillover from the Pt, whereby Ga3+ is reduced to Ga0, which then forms the alloy.[7,14] TPR and quasi-in situ XPS was employed to investigate the reducibility of the 3Ga and Pt3Ga catalysts. The temperature-programmed reduction TPR experiment showed that no hydrogen was being consumed while the catalyst was heated up to 700 °C under a constant hydrogen flow Figure S8. For the XPS experiment, the catalyst was reduced in a reactor, after which it was loaded into the XPS apparatus without being exposed to air. Again, no reduced Ga species were detected Figure S9. Apparently, the mixed Ga–Al oxide is too stable to be reduced at these conditions, even in the presence of chemisorption was used to study the effect of elevated temperatures on the Pt dispersion in reducing or oxidizing environments. The PtGaK catalyst was heated stepwise under either H2 or air at 350, 550, and 650 °C, without removing it from the chemisorption unit Figure S10. The Pt dispersion does not change, with an exception when the catalyst is treated at 650 °C under air; in this case the dispersion quickly collapses. During the regeneration step, the catalyst is treated at 750 °C under air, which would have similar effects on the Pt dispersion. Therefore, the Pt surface area does not correlate with the activity of the catalyst, meaning Pt is not the species mainly responsible for the PDH activity of the the trends observed with 71Ga NMR and XPS, the presence of Pt results in a higher concentration of surface tetrahedral Ga3+ species. Nevertheless, such a relatively small increase in active sites cannot account for the high activity observed for the Pt3Ga catalyst, compared to 3Ga. Since the only Pt-containing catalyst is almost inactive in the dehydrogenation reaction and the Pt dispersion drops severely after treatment under air at elevated temperatures, it is assumed that coordinately unsaturated Ga3+ species are responsible for the C=H bond activation.[15] The proposed reaction mechanisms for the dehydrogenation on Ga2O3 catalysts are discussed in a review by Copéret, in which he states that the dissociative adsorption of propane results in the formation of a surface hydroxy group and either a Ga alkyl or a Ga alkoxy species.[16] After the elimination of the β-hydrogen through the formation of hydride or a second hydroxy group, propene desorbs. However, as Pidko et al. have pointed out, the subsequent regeneration of the active sites through the formation of hydrogen is problematic, because the reduction of Ga3+ to Ga+ and H2O is energetically more favored.[17] For our catalyst material, the mixed Al–Ga oxide is too stable to be reduced, meaning that the GaH/GaOH species need to be regenerated. We postulate that the Pt assists in the recombination of the hydrogen atoms on the catalyst, making the active sites available for the following dehydrogenation the Pt3GaK catalyst was compared with a wide range of other catalyst materials reported in literature, as well as a commercial CrOx catalyst Figure S11. When comparing the propylene yield with the weight hourly space velocity, the Pt3GaK catalyst displays a superior activity, further highlighting the excellent catalytic performance of the summary, different Pt-Ga-K-containing catalyst materials have been examined for the selective dehydrogenation of propane into propene and it was found that the combination of 1000 ppm Pt and wt % Ga results in a highly active and selective catalyst. The catalyst is highly resistant to coking and remains active for prolonged reaction times. A combination of structural, morphological, and surface characterization reveals a complex catalyst material with a synergistic and bifunctional character originating from the supported Ga and Pt moieties, with Ga performing the actual dehydrogenation reaction and Pt being a unique promoting SectionThe catalyst materials under investigation have been prepared by the incipient wetness impregnation method using PtNH34NO32 %, GaNO33 %, and KNO3 >99 % as metal precursors and alumina as the support material. After impregnation, the catalyst is calcined at 750 °C under air. The catalyst materials have been characterized by a variety of techniques. Bright-field TEM analysis has been performed on a Tecnai 20 apparatus equipped with a field emission gun at 200 keV. XRD diffractograms were collected with a Bruker D2 Phaser, equipped with a Co Kα anode. For the N2-physisorption experiments a TriStar 3000 A has been used at −196 °C after drying the samples overnight. Catalytic tests have been performed on a reactor setup, which allows for combined operando UV/Vis, Raman, and on-line GC analysis.[18] A cylindrical quartz tube equipped with optical grade windows was loaded with g of catalyst material. The reaction was run at 620 °C with a flow of 9 mL min−1 of propane for 15 min, followed by a regeneration step at 750 °C with a flow of 6 % O2 in He for 30 min. During these reaction steps, operando UV/Vis and Raman spectra were collected by an Avantes 2048 UV/Vis spectrometer 50 accumulations and 70 ms exposure time and a Kaiser Optical Systems Raman spectrometer 7 accumulations and 5 s exposure time, respectively. The reaction stream was analyzed by an on-line GC, which was equipped with a flame ionization detector FID; Porabond-Q column and a thermal conductivity detector TCD; Carboxan column. Coked catalyst samples obtained after eight dehydrogenation cycles were examined on a PerkinElmer Pyris 1 TGA instrument. Between 10 and 25 mg of catalyst material was dried at 150 °C under an Ar flow and then heated under a flow of O2 from 30 to 900 °C at a ramp of 10 °C min−1. The gas stream exiting the TGA apparatus was analyzed by an Omnistar mass spectrometer from Pfeiffer Vacuum. The 71Ga MAS NMR experiments were performed in a T Bruker Avance III NMR system using an MAS rate of 16 kHz. To minimize baseline distortions, a windowless spin-echo pulse sequence was implemented, with an echo delay of 2 μs and a dead time of 5 μs.[19] The radio frequency field strength was set to 83 kHz and experiments conducted lasted for 12 days. XPS experiments were performed on a Thermo Scientific K-Alpha apparatus, equipped with an Al Kα eV X-ray anode. The catalysts were deposited on a carbon sticky tape in order to prevent charging. For analyzing the XPS spectra, the CasaXPS program is used. For the quasi-in situ experiment, the Pt3GaK catalyst was reduced for 1 h under a H2 flow at 620 °C, after which the sample was transferred to a Kratos AXIS Ultra spectrometer, equipped with a monochromatic X-ray source and a delay-line detector DLD. Spectra were obtained using the aluminum anode Al Kα= eV operating at 150 W and a background pressure of 2×10−9 bar. TPR experiments were performed on a Micromeritics Autochem II flow system, equipped with a TCD detector. g of catalyst is placed in a quartz tube, after which the sample is dried prior to being heated to 700 °C under a flow of 5 % H2 in He. A Micromeritics ASAP 2020 Accelerated Surface Area and Porosimetry System was used to analyze the Pt metal dispersion using CO adsorption. g of sample supported on a bed of quartz wool was loaded in a quartz sample tube and inserted in the instrument. The sample was pretreated prior to the chemisorption experiment by flushing nitrogen for 10 min at 35 °C, oxidizing the sample in a 10 %-oxygen-in-helium atmosphere at varying temperatures 10 °C min−1 ramp for 240 min, a reducing treatment in hydrogen at varying temperatures 10 °C min−1 for 240 min, and evacuating 5 μm Hg for 60 min at reaction temperature. The sample was analyzed with carbon monoxide at 35 °C with 15 pressure points from 25 mm Hg to 650 mm Hg. After completing the first isotherm, the sample was evacuated 10 μm Hg for one hour at 35 °C, after which a second isotherm was collected at the same conditions. The metal dispersion was calculated based on the difference of these isotherms extrapolated to 0 mm Hg, assuming a unitary ratio of carbon monoxide to surface “Shale has rocked world oil supply”, Houston Chronicle2013. May 15,, A1–A11[2b] Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 20132013. ­, 79[3] Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 20132013. ­, 10[4a] Caspary KJ, Gehrke H, Heinritz-Adrian M, Schwefer M. In Handbook of Heterogeneous Catalysis. Ertl G, Knözinger H, Weitkamp J, editors. Weinheim Wiley-VCH; 2008. pp. 3206–3216. Eds., pp. [Google Scholar][4b] Sokolov S, Stoyanova M, Rodemerck U, Linke D, Kondratenko EV. J. Catal. 2012;29367–75. [Google Scholar]4c. Bricker JC. Top. Catal. 2012;551309–1314. [Google Scholar][5a] “Engineering and construction Shale boom reinvigorates the industry, could lead to shortage of labour resources”, IHS Chem. Week2013 [5b] L. Hua, “News Focus China PDH projects to require massive propane imports”, ­.5c. Shale Gas, Competitiveness and New US Chemical Industry Investment An Analysis Based on Announced Projects, The American Chemistry Council2013. ­, 6–26[6a] Weckhuysen BM, Schoonheydt RA. Catal. Today. 1999;51223–232. [Google Scholar][6b] Bhasin MM, McCain JH, Vora BV, Imai T, Pujadó PR. Appl. Catal. A. 2001;221397–419. [Google Scholar][6c] Aitani AM. Oil Gas Eur. Mag. 2004;3036. [Google Scholar][6d] Caspary KJ, Gehrke H, Heinritz-Adrian M, Schwefer M. In Handbook of Heterogeneous Catalysis. Ertl G, Knözinger H, Weitkamp J, editors. Weinheim Wiley-VCH; 2008. pp. 3221–3225. Eds., pp. . [Google Scholar]6e. Won W, Lee KS, Lee S, Jung C. Comput. Chem. Eng. 2010;34508–517. [Google Scholar][7a] Jablonski EL, Castro AA, Scelza OA, de Miguel SR. Appl. Catal. A. 1999;183189–198. [Google Scholar][7b] Sun P, Siddiqi G, Chi M, Bell AT. J. Catal. 2010;274192–199. [Google Scholar]7c. Siddiqi G, Sun P, Galvita V, Bell AT. J. Catal. 2010;274200–206. [Google Scholar][8a] Tinnemans SJ, Kox MHF, Nijhuis TA, Visser T, Weckhuysen BM. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2005;7211–216. [PubMed] [Google Scholar][8b] Iglesias-Juez A, Beale AM, Maaijen K, Weng TC, Glatzel P, Weckhuysen BM. J. Catal. 2010;276268–279. [Google Scholar][9] Michorczyk P, Ogonowski J. Appl. Catal. A. 2003;251425–433. [Google Scholar][10] Bartholomew CH. Appl. Catal. A. 2001;21217–60. [Google Scholar]Nagai Y, Dohmae K, Ikeda Y, Takagi N, Tanabe T, Hara N, Guilera G, Pascarelli S, Newton MA, Kuno O, Jiang H, Shinjoh H, Matsumoto S. Angew. Chem. 2008;120 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2008;47 [Google Scholar][11] Sattler JJHB, Beale AM, Weckhuysen BM. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2013;1512095–12103. [PubMed] [Google Scholar][12] Otero Areán C, Rodríguez Delgado M, Montouillout V, Massiot D. Z. Anorg. Allg. Chem. 2005;6312121–2126. [Google Scholar][13] Chen M, Xu J, Su FZ, Liu YM, Cao Y, He HY, Fan KN. J. Catal. 2008;256293–300. [Google Scholar][14a] Iwasa N, Mayanagi T, Ogawa N, Sakata K, Takezawa N. Catal. Lett. 1998;54119–123. [Google Scholar][14b] Domínguez F, Sánchez J, Arteaga G, Choren E. J. Mol. Catal. A. 2005;228319–324. [Google Scholar][15a] Lavalley JC, Daturi M, Montouillout V, Clet G, Otero Areán C, Rodriguez Delgado M, Sahibed-dine A. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2003;51301–1305. [Google Scholar][15b] Zheng B, Hua W, Yue Y, Gao Z. J. Catal. 2005;232143–151. [Google Scholar]15c. Takahashi M, Nakatani T, Iwamoto S, Watanabe T, Inoue M. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2006;453678–3685. [Google Scholar][16b] Liu Y, Li ZH, Lu J, Fan KN. J. Phys. Chem. C. 2008;11220382–20392. [Google Scholar][17] Pidko E, Hensen E, van Santen RA. J. Phys. Chem. C. 2007;11113068–13075. [Google Scholar][18] Nijhuis TA, Tinnemans SJ, Visser T, Weckhuysen BM. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2003;54361–4365. [Google Scholar][19] Ma C, Li P, Chen Q, Zhang S. J. Magn. Reson. 2013;23387–91. [PubMed] [Google Scholar][20a] Vu BK, Shin EW. Catal. Lett. 2011;141699–704. [Google Scholar][20b] Vu BK, Song MB, Ahn IY, Suh YW, Kim WI, Koh HL, Choi YG, Shin EW. Appl. Catal. A. 2011;40025–33. [Google Scholar][21a] Carli R, Bianchi CL. Appl. Surf. Sci. 1994;7499–102. [Google Scholar][21b] Priyantha W, Radhakrishnan G, Droopad R, Passlack M. J. Cryst. Growth. 2011;323103–106. [Google Scholar][22a] Adler AF, Keavney JJ. J. Phys. Chem. 1960;64208–212. [Google Scholar][22b] Lee TJ, Kim YG. J. Catal. 1984;90279–291. [Google Scholar]22c. Bradley SA, Sinkler W, Brown DA, Bigelow W, Voyles PM, Allard LF. Catal. Lett. 2012;142176–182. [Google Scholar]
Theallowable concentration was dropped to 0.25% in 1992, and in 1997 it was further reduced to 0.1% . Though any house built prior to 1970, which would comprise millions of homes, may contain lead-based paint on interior or exterior walls or woodwork, there is limited systematic data on the prevalence of lead paint hazards in Australia's housing [ 188 ].
Las Vegas, Seattle, San Diego, Orlando and countless communities in between will see mail service slow by as much as a day under the Postal Service’s strategic restructuring plan, a Washington Post analysis new delivery regimen, which takes effect Oct. 1, disproportionately affects states west of the Rocky Mountains and the country’s mainland extremities, including large swaths of southern Texas and proposed service standards, or the amount of time the agency says it should take to deliver a piece of first-class mail, represent the biggest slowdown of mail services in more than a generation, experts say. It involves significant reductions in airmail — a Postal Service tradition dating to 1918 — and geographic restrictions on how far a piece of mail can travel within a percent of first-class mail sent to Nevada will take longer to arrive, according to The Post’s analysis, as will 60 percent of the deliveries to Florida, 58 percent to Washington state, 57 percent to Montana, and 55 percent to Arizona and Oregon. In all, at least a third of such letters and parcels addressed to 27 states will arrive more slowly under the new General Louis DeJoy contends the plan will cut costs, revitalize the agency’s network and create more consistency in transportation schedules. Though the Postal Service has significantly outpaced its own financial expectations so far this year, it faces a projected $160 billion deficit over the next decade. It estimates that the transportation changes will save as much as $10 billion over that span.“This allows, from our perspective, for the customers to plan, to have predictability,” Robert Cintron, the Postal Service’s vice president of logistics, said in an interview. “They’re going to know what they’re going to get. There’s that one to two days for the longest [delivery] distances that we have to achieve, and we have to achieve those today. Whether we’re traversing 300 or 3,000 miles, it’s the same service standard. And that’s really the part that we see that’s not sustainable.”[Slow mail is no way for USPS to cut costs, bipartisan group of lawmakers tells The Post]The logistical challenges, for example, of getting a letter from Maine to the Grand Canyon — where the agency famously delivers mail from a sack on a mule — won’t change, even if the time allotted to make the deliveries consumer advocates and the mailing industry’s largely friendly but competitive stakeholders have panned the new initiative, saying it will harm customers, drive away mail users and further erode the 246-year-old agency’s credibility, which has taken a hit after a year of pronounced delivery general from 21 states, led by Pennsylvania and New York, in June wrote to the Postal Regulatory Commission PRC to oppose the changes, arguing they discriminate against mail consumers based on geography and that the Postal Service was poised to fall back into poor operational decisions that slowed mail service in the run-up to the 2020 elections.“Only once the Postal Service has shown that it can reliably meet its performance targets should it consider whether it is necessary to change its service standards to address long-term trends in the utilization of its products,” the group Postal Service plans to raise prices on certain mail products — pushing the price of a first-class stamp from 55 to 58 cents — while reducing service standards. For each change, the agency must seek an advisory opinion from the PRC but those rulings are not enforceable. The Postal Service can proceed with the changes regardless of the outcome.“It’s codified in law that the Postal Service is supposed to be binding the nation together,” said Doug Carlson, a postal advocate who cross-examined agency executives during a June hearing before the PRC. “And I don’t think you bind the nation together by saying, Well, if you live on one of the coasts, then you’re going to get slow service just because you’re far away from everyone else.’ ”The new standards would apply only to mail on which the Postal Service holds a monopoly, including first-class mail, like letters and postcards, and such periodicals as newspapers and magazines. The agency in June announced plans to lengthen delivery windows on “first-class package service,” which are small parcels often used to ship medications, lightweight e-commerce purchases and small electronics.[What’s in Louis DeJoy’s 10-year plan for the USPS]DeJoy and agency leaders say the new expectations will provide more stability for delivery schedules, noting that the Postal Service has not hit its current mail service standards — two days for mail sent within 279 miles, three days for mail sent further, with a timely delivery rate of 96 percent — for close to a decade. In fact, the agency has not surpassed 90 percent since DeJoy instituted cost-cutting measures last also contend that adding as much as two days on certain mail deliveries will not fundamentally alter the agency’s service and that individual mailers and businesses will be able to easily adjust to the new time delivery windows are based largely on changes in mail transportation. The Postal Service plans would halve the amount of mail it transports by plane, instead moving it across the country by truck. The agency contends the move will save money and improve reliability; by the end of 2020, only 58 percent of air-transport trips arrived on time, the agency reported, forcing it to spend more on extra mail items through the agency’s network by plane requires 11 mail-handling steps at minimum, the agency says, while trucks require only five steps.“When an entire plane of mail off the West Coast misses coming into the East Coast, it’s not a little bit of volume that you’re impacting. You’re impacting many customers because of that unreliability,” Cintron said. “Again, our focus is to put it on the ground where we know what we can control.”The new standards allot two days for items traveling as far as 139 miles, three days for 930 miles, four days for 1,907 miles and five days for anything beyond, with an on-time rate of 95 would arrive in two days if delivery is within an eight-hour driving radius, three days within 32 hours, four days within 50 hours and five days for anything further. The current service standard sets delivery times for two or three days regardless of many experts say a shake-up of this magnitude will present major mail disruptions, and could mean higher costs for consumers. Mailers and package shippers have cultivated finely calibrated processes, they say, designed to ship everything from utility bills to bank statements to medications. They are engineered to seamlessly interact with the Postal Service’s schedules and will face unprecedented disruptions to adapt to the new delivery standards.“From a pharmacist’s perspective, you’re really, as a provider, at the mercy of a delayed logistical system,” said Anthony Ciaccia, senior adviser at the American Pharmacists Association. “Now it’s a crapshoot. Is it going to be two days, three days, four days, five days, a week? Two? What happens if it ends up in the wrong spot? Now, you restart that process all over again. To me, it just adds unnecessary delays in a treatment plan that has exigency, and life and death and well-being is on the line.”“As a mailer, you really can’t control how the Postal Service’s network is set up,” said Todd Haycock, president of the Major Mailers Association trade group. “But it appears that the Postal Service is optimizing their network for packages and moving mail to something that’s less important.”The Postal Service also dropped its on-time delivery targets — the percentage at which it says mail should arrive on time — to the lowest point in recent memory. The agency amended its 2020 report to Congress on May 14, five months after it turned in the original report, and revised its service targets to 88 percent for two-day first-class mail, and 69 percent for three-to-five-day first-class spokesman David Partenheimer wrote in an emailed statement that the Postal Service amended the report because it needed additional time to assess the effects of the pandemic on transportation capacity and employee availability.“The Postal Service has studied customer preferences, and found that reliability is a top driver of customer satisfaction,” Partenheimer wrote. “Consequently, we are confident that the public will benefit from our effort to introduce greater predictability.”The agency announced the new service standards — part of DeJoy’s “Delivering for America” plan — less than one month before President Biden’s three appointees to the Postal Service’s nine-member governing board were the strategy was endorsed by the six sitting governors — all Trump administration appointees — it was widely condemned on Capitol Hill. A group of House Democrats even introduced legislation to block it, naming it the Delivering Envelopes Judiciously On-time Year-round Act, or DEJOY Act.“I’m not necessarily bought into moving the goal posts on service right out of the gate,” newly sworn governor Amber McReynolds I said in an interview, “especially when we thought the pandemic was the reason behind [service problems].”[FBI inquiry of USPS chief DeJoy threatens bipartisan overhaul bill]The Post’s analysis used Postal Service data submitted to the PRC that outlined the current and proposed service standards for mail sent between combinations of three-digit Zip codes. Zip codes can be combined by their first three digits to cover larger geographic areas. The Post calculated the average change in service standards, weighted by the amount of mail sent between those Zip codes. The agency did not report data on Alaska, Hawaii or Puerto and Republicans in both chambers of Congress told The Post they’d review the new delivery timetables with a focus on how they affected their constituents and how the agency could better balance its service obligations with its financial particular concern, officials of both parties said, is how the new standards will slow mail to rural communities. Postal Service logistics, modeling and analytics director Stephen Hagenstein said in written testimony to the PRC that the service standards would have roughly equal effects on urban and rural Zip codes. The Post’s analysis reached a similar conclusion.“I’m telling you that the mail, in my opinion, in my state has not gone by where the Pony Express is. It’s really important,” said Sen. Jon Tester D-Mont.. “So what are you trying to do here? I mean, you’re trying to just eliminate rural America, is that what the goal is? Because where I come from … people still depend upon the mail.”“If people are going to experience a reduction in service,” said Rep. Mark Amodei R-Nev., “I want to see two things One, that it has got some sort of fairness instead of just, Oh, yeah, it ends up regional.’ And two, I want to know that there was some sort of market analysis done … because I think the last thing you would want if you’re competing in terms of delivering communications in this day and age is, Oh, we’re going to deliver them slower.’ I just don’t see that as market-neutral.”Dylan Moriarty contributed to this report. 2015年12月. 日本文化・季節. 『忘年会で飲みすぎた』『付き合いで参加』を英語で？. ”End of year party"で通じるの？. 2015年12月20日. 瞬間英作文トレーニング. 【ダニ・マダニを英語で？. 】【ダニに刺された！. 】を英語で？. Help Create Join Login Summary Files Reviews Support Wiki Mailing Lists Tickets ▾ Current Development Branch Feature Requests Current Stable Branch Bugs Patches Docs Tracker Internationalization Plugins News Code Menu ▾ ▴ squirrelmail-plugins From Derek Xu - 2007-11-20 234410 Hello - I am trying to set up spam_button plugin to report spam via email. The plugin was installed successfully. However, when a user clicks on either the "Spam" or the "Non-Spam" button, it generates the following error message Could not send report Requested action aborted error in processing 451 See The mentioned page shows it has a bare LF issue. However, I don't have any problem to report spam/non-spam if I manually forward the message to the destionation email addresses. I don't have any problem to send out/receive messages either. The log for tcpserver doesn't provide any useful information. However, if I enable simscan it generates error messges like "no envelope information, deferred exit". My system's setup is as follows, OS Solaris 10 SMTP server qmail-ldap IMAP server UW IMAP Anti-Spam DSPAM Web server Apache server PHP webmail plugin installed Thanks, Derek From Paul Lesniewski - 2007-11-20 235121 On Nov 20, 2007 344 PM, Derek Xu wrote > Hello - > > I am trying to set up spam_button plugin to report spam via email. The > plugin was installed successfully. However, when a user clicks on > either the "Spam" or the "Non-Spam" button, it generates the following > error message > Could not send report > Requested action aborted error in processing > 451 See > > The mentioned page shows it has a bare LF issue. Exactly what is this issue? You need to post more details/explanation. I'm not aware of any problem with how the plugin sends messages via its forwarding mechanism. > However, I don't > have any problem to report spam/non-spam if I manually forward the > message to the destionation email addresses. I don't have any problem > to send out/receive messages either. > > The log for tcpserver doesn't provide any useful information. However, > if I enable simscan it generates error messges like > "no envelope information, deferred exit". How is the plugin configured to forward messages? How does that differ from your core SM settings? Can you send mail with SM correctly? It would be most helpful if the SMTP or sendmail conversation could be sniffed. > My system's setup is as follows, > > OS Solaris 10 > SMTP server qmail-ldap > IMAP server UW IMAP > Anti-Spam DSPAM > Web server Apache server > PHP > webmail > plugin installed > > From Derek Xu - 2007-11-21 154941 The issue is users are not able to report spam by clicking the buttons/links provided by the plugin. The error message indicates the failure is due to a bare linefeed issue of the mailer. The plugin was configured to only use report-by-email option $is_spam_resend_destination = 'spamDOMAIN'; $is_not_spam_resend_destination = 'notspamDOMAIN'; $spam_report_email_method = 'bounce'; $is_spam_subject_prefix = ''; $is_not_spam_subject_prefix = ''; spam_report_smtpServerAddress = ''; $spam_report_smtpPort = ''; $spam_report_useSendmail = ''; $spam_report_smtp_auth_mech = ''; $spam_report_use_smtp_tls = ''; I don't have any problem to send out email from SM. Moreover, I don't have any problem to report spam by forwarding the suspicious message to sp...my... via using the default "Forward" link on core SM. It's difficult,if not impossible, to sniff the traffic between SMTP and SM, because the SMTP is running on a non-global zone of a Solaris 10 system. Sniffing tools, like snoop, does not work in a non-global zone because it uses DLPI to directly access interface drivers. Thanks, -Derek On Nov 20, 2007 551 PM, Paul Lesniewski wrote > On Nov 20, 2007 344 PM, Derek Xu wrote > > Hello - > > > > I am trying to set up spam_button plugin to report spam via email. The > > plugin was installed successfully. However, when a user clicks on > > either the "Spam" or the "Non-Spam" button, it generates the following > > error message > > Could not send report > > Requested action aborted error in processing > > 451 See > > > > The mentioned page shows it has a bare LF issue. > > Exactly what is this issue? You need to post more > details/explanation. I'm not aware of any problem with how the plugin > sends messages via its forwarding mechanism. > > > However, I don't > > have any problem to report spam/non-spam if I manually forward the > > message to the destionation email addresses. I don't have any problem > > to send out/receive messages either. > > > > The log for tcpserver doesn't provide any useful information. However, > > if I enable simscan it generates error messges like > > "no envelope information, deferred exit". > > How is the plugin configured to forward messages? How does that > differ from your core SM settings? Can you send mail with SM > correctly? It would be most helpful if the SMTP or sendmail > conversation could be sniffed. > > > My system's setup is as follows, > > > > OS Solaris 10 > > SMTP server qmail-ldap > > IMAP server UW IMAP > > Anti-Spam DSPAM > > Web server Apache server > > PHP > > webmail > > plugin installed > > > > > > - > This email is sponsored by Microsoft > Defy all challenges. MicrosoftR Visual Studio 2005. > > - > squirrelmail-plugins mailing list > Posting guidelines > List address squir...li... > List archives > List info subscribe/unsubscribe/change options > From Paul Lesniewski - 2007-11-21 210238 Please DO NOT top-post. Read the mailing list posting guidelines if you have any doubts. > The issue is users are not able to report spam by clicking the > buttons/links provided by the plugin. The error message indicates the > failure is due to a bare linefeed issue of the mailer. Then please show the error. > The plugin was configured to only use report-by-email option > > $is_spam_resend_destination = 'spamDOMAIN'; > $is_not_spam_resend_destination = 'notspamDOMAIN'; > $spam_report_email_method = 'bounce'; What is $useSendmail in the main SM config file? Does the problem persist if you change $useSendmail to false? What about if you change $spam_report_email_method to 'attachment'? > $is_spam_subject_prefix = ''; > $is_not_spam_subject_prefix = ''; > spam_report_smtpServerAddress = ''; > $spam_report_smtpPort = ''; > $spam_report_useSendmail = ''; > $spam_report_smtp_auth_mech = ''; > $spam_report_use_smtp_tls = ''; > > I don't have any problem to send out email from SM. Moreover, I don't > have any problem to report spam by forwarding the suspicious message > to sp...my... via using the default "Forward" link on core SM. > > It's difficult,if not impossible, to sniff the traffic between SMTP > and SM, because the SMTP is running on a non-global zone of a Solaris > 10 system. Sniffing tools, like snoop, does not work in a non-global > zone because it uses DLPI to directly access interface drivers. That is not going to make this very easy to find your problem..... > On Nov 20, 2007 551 PM, Paul Lesniewski wrote > > On Nov 20, 2007 344 PM, Derek Xu wrote > > > Hello - > > > > > > I am trying to set up spam_button plugin to report spam via email. The > > > plugin was installed successfully. However, when a user clicks on > > > either the "Spam" or the "Non-Spam" button, it generates the following > > > error message > > > Could not send report > > > Requested action aborted error in processing > > > 451 See > > > > > > The mentioned page shows it has a bare LF issue. > > > > Exactly what is this issue? You need to post more > > details/explanation. I'm not aware of any problem with how the plugin > > sends messages via its forwarding mechanism. > > > > > However, I don't > > > have any problem to report spam/non-spam if I manually forward the > > > message to the destionation email addresses. I don't have any problem > > > to send out/receive messages either. > > > > > > The log for tcpserver doesn't provide any useful information. However, > > > if I enable simscan it generates error messges like > > > "no envelope information, deferred exit". > > > > How is the plugin configured to forward messages? How does that > > differ from your core SM settings? Can you send mail with SM > > correctly? It would be most helpful if the SMTP or sendmail > > conversation could be sniffed. > > > > > My system's setup is as follows, > > > > > > OS Solaris 10 > > > SMTP server qmail-ldap > > > IMAP server UW IMAP > > > Anti-Spam DSPAM > > > Web server Apache server > > > PHP > > > webmail > > > plugin installed > > > > > > From Derek Xu - 2007-11-21 212553 > > The issue is users are not able to report spam by clicking the > > buttons/links provided by the plugin. The error message indicates the > > failure is due to a bare linefeed issue of the mailer. > > Then please show the error. The error says Could not send report Requested action aborted error in processing 451 See > > The plugin was configured to only use report-by-email option > > > > $is_spam_resend_destination = 'spamDOMAIN'; > > $is_not_spam_resend_destination = 'notspamDOMAIN'; > > $spam_report_email_method = 'bounce'; > > What is $useSendmail in the main SM config file? Does the problem > persist if you change $useSendmail to false? What about if you change > $spam_report_email_method to 'attachment'? $useSendmail = false; if I change $spam_report_email_method to 'attachment', it shows "Successfully reported as spam", but it also shows " ERROR Connection dropped by IMAP server. Query FETCH 68 BODY[HEADER]" In addition, DSPAM does not seem to be trained if "attachment" method is selected. > > $is_spam_subject_prefix = ''; > > $is_not_spam_subject_prefix = ''; > > spam_report_smtpServerAddress = ''; > > $spam_report_smtpPort = ''; > > $spam_report_useSendmail = ''; > > $spam_report_smtp_auth_mech = ''; > > $spam_report_use_smtp_tls = ''; > > > > I don't have any problem to send out email from SM. Moreover, I don't > > have any problem to report spam by forwarding the suspicious message > > to sp...my... via using the default "Forward" link on core SM. > > > > It's difficult,if not impossible, to sniff the traffic between SMTP > > and SM, because the SMTP is running on a non-global zone of a Solaris > > 10 system. Sniffing tools, like snoop, does not work in a non-global > > zone because it uses DLPI to directly access interface drivers. > > That is not going to make this very easy to find your problem..... > > > > > On Nov 20, 2007 551 PM, Paul Lesniewski wrote > > > On Nov 20, 2007 344 PM, Derek Xu wrote > > > > Hello - > > > > > > > > I am trying to set up spam_button plugin to report spam via email. The > > > > plugin was installed successfully. However, when a user clicks on > > > > either the "Spam" or the "Non-Spam" button, it generates the following > > > > error message > > > > Could not send report > > > > Requested action aborted error in processing > > > > 451 See > > > > > > > > The mentioned page shows it has a bare LF issue. > > > > > > Exactly what is this issue? You need to post more > > > details/explanation. I'm not aware of any problem with how the plugin > > > sends messages via its forwarding mechanism. > > > > > > > However, I don't > > > > have any problem to report spam/non-spam if I manually forward the > > > > message to the destionation email addresses. I don't have any problem > > > > to send out/receive messages either. > > > > > > > > The log for tcpserver doesn't provide any useful information. However, > > > > if I enable simscan it generates error messges like > > > > "no envelope information, deferred exit". > > > > > > How is the plugin configured to forward messages? How does that > > > differ from your core SM settings? Can you send mail with SM > > > correctly? It would be most helpful if the SMTP or sendmail > > > conversation could be sniffed. > > > > > > > My system's setup is as follows, > > > > > > > > OS Solaris 10 > > > > SMTP server qmail-ldap > > > > IMAP server UW IMAP > > > > Anti-Spam DSPAM > > > > Web server Apache server > > > > PHP > > > > webmail > > > > plugin installed > > > > > > > > > > - > This email is sponsored by Microsoft > Defy all challenges. MicrosoftR Visual Studio 2005. > > - > squirrelmail-plugins mailing list > Posting guidelines > List address squir...li... > List archives > List info subscribe/unsubscribe/change options > From Paul Lesniewski - 2007-11-25 083723 On Nov 21, 2007 125 PM, Derek Xu wrote > > > The issue is users are not able to report spam by clicking the > > > buttons/links provided by the plugin. The error message indicates the > > > failure is due to a bare linefeed issue of the mailer. > > > > Then please show the error. > > The error says > > Could not send report > > Requested action aborted error in processing > 451 See Does this happen with any message? Do your messages contain \n.\n anywhere in them? If you are using an unmolested SquirrelMail core, then I can't immediately see what the problem would be the message is sent using the core mailing functionality. See for yourself that SquirrelMail sends the correct CRLF at line 245 in class/deliver/ This seems to imply that there might be some \n.\n that gets sent before that, but without you sniffing the SMTP conversation, it's not something I'm sure anyone can help you with. > > > The plugin was configured to only use report-by-email option > > > > > > $is_spam_resend_destination = 'spamDOMAIN'; > > > $is_not_spam_resend_destination = 'notspamDOMAIN'; > > > $spam_report_email_method = 'bounce'; > > > > What is $useSendmail in the main SM config file? Does the problem > > persist if you change $useSendmail to false? What about if you change > > $spam_report_email_method to 'attachment'? > > $useSendmail = false; > if I change $spam_report_email_method to 'attachment', > it shows "Successfully reported as spam", but it also shows > " ERROR Connection dropped by IMAP server. Query FETCH 68 BODY[HEADER]" > In addition, DSPAM does not seem to be trained if "attachment" method > is selected. > > > > > $is_spam_subject_prefix = ''; > > > $is_not_spam_subject_prefix = ''; > > > spam_report_smtpServerAddress = ''; > > > $spam_report_smtpPort = ''; > > > $spam_report_useSendmail = ''; > > > $spam_report_smtp_auth_mech = ''; > > > $spam_report_use_smtp_tls = ''; > > > > > > I don't have any problem to send out email from SM. Moreover, I don't > > > have any problem to report spam by forwarding the suspicious message > > > to sp...my... via using the default "Forward" link on core SM. > > > > > > It's difficult,if not impossible, to sniff the traffic between SMTP > > > and SM, because the SMTP is running on a non-global zone of a Solaris > > > 10 system. Sniffing tools, like snoop, does not work in a non-global > > > zone because it uses DLPI to directly access interface drivers. > > > > That is not going to make this very easy to find your problem..... > > > > > > > > > On Nov 20, 2007 551 PM, Paul Lesniewski wrote > > > > On Nov 20, 2007 344 PM, Derek Xu wrote > > > > > Hello - > > > > > > > > > > I am trying to set up spam_button plugin to report spam via email. The > > > > > plugin was installed successfully. However, when a user clicks on > > > > > either the "Spam" or the "Non-Spam" button, it generates the following > > > > > error message > > > > > Could not send report > > > > > Requested action aborted error in processing > > > > > 451 See > > > > > > > > > > The mentioned page shows it has a bare LF issue. > > > > > > > > Exactly what is this issue? You need to post more > > > > details/explanation. I'm not aware of any problem with how the plugin > > > > sends messages via its forwarding mechanism. > > > > > > > > > However, I don't > > > > > have any problem to report spam/non-spam if I manually forward the > > > > > message to the destionation email addresses. I don't have any problem > > > > > to send out/receive messages either. > > > > > > > > > > The log for tcpserver doesn't provide any useful information. However, > > > > > if I enable simscan it generates error messges like > > > > > "no envelope information, deferred exit". > > > > > > > > How is the plugin configured to forward messages? How does that > > > > differ from your core SM settings? Can you send mail with SM > > > > correctly? It would be most helpful if the SMTP or sendmail > > > > conversation could be sniffed. > > > > > > > > > My system's setup is as follows, > > > > > > > > > > OS Solaris 10 > > > > > SMTP server qmail-ldap > > > > > IMAP server UW IMAP > > > > > Anti-Spam DSPAM > > > > > Web server Apache server > > > > > PHP > > > > > webmail > > > > > plugin installed > > > > > > > > > > From Derek Xu - 2007-11-26 222621 > > Does this happen with any message? Do your messages contain \n.\n > anywhere in them? If you are using an unmolested SquirrelMail core, > then I can't immediately see what the problem would be the message is > sent using the core mailing functionality. I just noticed that, for the same message, if I report via checking it on the message list and clicking on "Spam" button, it appears working fine. However, if I try to report via viewing the individual message and clicking the "Spam" link, it generates the following error message ERROR Connection dropped by IMAP server. Query FETCH 81 BODY[HEADER] Yes, it happens to any message. -Derek From Paul Lesniewski - 2007-11-27 010126 On Nov 26, 2007 226 PM, Derek Xu wrote > > > > Does this happen with any message? Do your messages contain \n.\n > > anywhere in them? If you are using an unmolested SquirrelMail core, > > then I can't immediately see what the problem would be the message is > > sent using the core mailing functionality. > > I just noticed that, for the same message, if I report via checking it > on the message list and clicking on "Spam" button, it appears working > fine. The reporting mechanism is NOT different between the message list and the message view, just how it is accessed and where it returns to after reporting. This makes me feel like the problem is with the mail server?. > However, if I try to report via viewing the individual message > and clicking the "Spam" link, it generates the following error > message > ERROR Connection dropped by IMAP server. > Query FETCH 81 BODY[HEADER] Since when did it change from what you were showing as the error before? What is the difference between your configuration when you got that bare LF error and this one? You have to give every single, last detail - I cannot guess what changed. If the IMAP server is timing out or dropping the connection, that's not SquirrelMail's fault - check your IMAP log file and make sure your IMAP server is correctly configured. > Yes, it happens to any message. From Derek Xu - 2007-11-27 153738 > > However, if I try to report via viewing the individual message > > and clicking the "Spam" link, it generates the following error > > message > > ERROR Connection dropped by IMAP server. > > Query FETCH 81 BODY[HEADER] > > Since when did it change from what you were showing as the error > before? What is the difference between your configuration when you > got that bare LF error and this one? You have to give every single, > last detail - I cannot guess what changed. If the IMAP server is > timing out or dropping the connection, that's not SquirrelMail's fault > - check your IMAP log file and make sure your IMAP server is correctly > configured. > If the $spam_report_email_method is set to 'bounce', I got the bare LF error; If it is set to " attachement", I got the above Query error when I report via the "Spam" link on the message view. No other changes were made. I noticed , whenever there is a bare LF error or query error on SM, in the IMAP log it shows "Unexpected client disconnect, while reading line user=testuser host=testhost". What I don't understand is how come reporting via maunally forwarding as well as normal sending out emails don't have this kind of problem. From Paul Lesniewski - 2007-11-27 211304 On Nov 27, 2007 737 AM, Derek Xu wrote > > > However, if I try to report via viewing the individual message > > > and clicking the "Spam" link, it generates the following error > > > message > > > ERROR Connection dropped by IMAP server. > > > Query FETCH 81 BODY[HEADER] > > > > Since when did it change from what you were showing as the error > > before? What is the difference between your configuration when you > > got that bare LF error and this one? You have to give every single, > > last detail - I cannot guess what changed. If the IMAP server is > > timing out or dropping the connection, that's not SquirrelMail's fault > > - check your IMAP log file and make sure your IMAP server is correctly > > configured. > > > > If the $spam_report_email_method is set to 'bounce', I got the bare > LF error; If it is set to " attachement", I got the above Query error More specifically, a "connection dropped" error. Again, no one except YOU can tell us why the IMAP server chose to drop the connection. I can't do much more w/out more information; at this point, the mail server seems from here to be a little borked. > when I report via the "Spam" link on the message view. No other > changes were made. > > I noticed , whenever there is a bare LF error or query error on SM, > in the IMAP log it shows "Unexpected client disconnect, while reading > line user=testuser host=testhost". What I don't understand is how come > reporting via maunally forwarding as well as normal sending out emails > don't have this kind of problem. Me either. Simplesteps to fix email error 550 in Outlook , 2010 & 2007 when you got error 550 during sending a message with outlook.

Free Pro Business Free $10/mo $15/mo Choose Choose Choose Custom LogoAdd logos to all protected items - Custom creator profileA public list that shows all the items a creator/owner has in DMCA system - Digital Ink SignatureSign with your mobile, tablet, finger, mouse, touchpad etc. Add ItemsItems add to content registry. Get your content registered in a globally recognized 3rd party system. Max itemsUnlimited number of items can add to content registry. Over 400 million assets already under protection Unlimited Unlimited Unlimited DashboardIn DMCA dashboard takedowns, monitoring, lookups etc are much easier and more convenient APIDMCA API access QR grants your content a QR code to be used for public identification purposes, QR code link back to your profiles Site ProfileOthers can view the ownership / profile information of claimed owner Shorty URLPermanent, shortened hyperlink to content status page Site AlertsTracking and change info preserved and made public Encrypted grants your content an id and a badge and QR code to be used for public identification purposes, all these links and ids link back to your profiles Account VerificationSite verified means has confirmed the DNS / page is controlled by given name or has a billing relationship in place. Extra verification levels are detailed where presented Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 DIY DMCA offers a complete online toolkit for you to create, research and conduct your own takedowns. Complete with an easy to use takedown case management system, website detective, auto-generating takedown form, and a download option so you can email the takedown request - Pro Version Pro Version DIY templates US, EU, IndiaIncludes the following DIY DMCA Templates US, EU, INDIA - right click blockingDisable right click on web pages - copy scannerCopy scanner - monitoringKeep an eye on your digital content with Monitoring Services - 10 items/month 100 items/month image lookupImage monitoring is the ability to scan daily, weekly, monthly for one or more images of your choice. You simply upload 1 or more photos and we monitor them as often as you like. Image monitoring uses 5 scan credits more expensive than text. A scan credit is 1 scan per month. So to monitor 1 image every week would be 5 scan credits per week. Need more? you can easily upgrade from your dashboard. Volume discounts apply - 10 items/month 100 items/month content ownershipverificationTracking and change info preserved and made public. Others can view the ownership / profile information of claimed owner Claim Only Assigned per item Assigned per item Choose Choose Choose Free $10/mo $15/mo FREE PRO BUSINESS

WoOv.
  • 3afz9b1lzs.pages.dev/97
  • 3afz9b1lzs.pages.dev/82
  • 3afz9b1lzs.pages.dev/166
  • 3afz9b1lzs.pages.dev/359
  • 3afz9b1lzs.pages.dev/146
  • 3afz9b1lzs.pages.dev/67
  • 3afz9b1lzs.pages.dev/147
  • 3afz9b1lzs.pages.dev/73
  • 3afz9b1lzs.pages.dev/222

    • 550 mail dropped bare lf found