On Wed, 2010-01-20 at 12:03 +1300, David Woodhouse wrote: > Exim _will_ add a Message-Id: header under certain circumstances, but I > don't believe it does so this early -- so $h_message-id should still be > empty at the time we're testing it.
Having looked at Raymond's logs, it seems that you're right. The Message-Id is being added by Exim locally and thus the hash is coming out differently. You can tell from the rejection message. One says: Greylisted <<[email protected]>> from <[email protected]> for offences: We greylist all mail And the other says: Greylisted <<[email protected]>> from <[email protected]> for offences: We greylist all mail, On my own systems, this doesn't happen. I get: 2010-01-19 23:09:47 +0000 1NXNCH-0007Ao-12 H=(me) [131.203.100.9] F=<[email protected]> temporarily rejected after DATA: Greylisted <> from <[email protected]> for offences: Sending host 131.203.100.9 lacks correct reverse DNS or CSA for HELO 'me',Message has 4.9 SpamAssassin points,Message has no Message-Id: header, which RFC5322 says it SHOULD, Note the empty Message-Id. So what's different in Raymond's setup such that $h_message-id is actually set when we evaluate it? What version of Exim is this? -- dwmw2 -- ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
