Josef Liška schreef:
But it sends vacation messages with null envelope sender, which is in
my opinion undesirable, because many vacation messages are caught in
spam filters.
I think there could be same sender on envelope.
In dovecot-sieve/src/sieve-cmu.c around line 380 is a call to
smtp_client_open(src->addr, NULL, &f);
NULL could be replaced with src->fromaddr
[...]
Summary:
I expect messages sent by vacation recipe should have envelope from
same as user's e-mail address. This is then writen to Return-Path:
header by receiving MTA
NULL envelope from is used, resulting (in my case) to Return-Path: <>
rewriten by postfix to Return-Path: <MAILER-DAEMON> by receiving MTA
Interesting. I've seen a very similar suggestion yesterday. However, as
I explained in the previous post, the use of a non-null envelope from
field is discouraged by the Sieve vacation RFC (5230) and also by a more
generic RFC (3834) describing the do's and dont's regarding auto-responders:
http://www.dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2008-August/032799.html
It puzzles me why spam filters would reject messages with a <> return
path, which is a very common an valid use of the SMTP protocol. What
spam filter are we talking about anyway?
Regards,
Stephan.
