On 03.10.2011, at 00:35, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Simeon Ott:
>> and how did you guys configure gnarwl without having these problems?
>> am i the only one who experienced this with GNARWL? that sounds a
>> bit strange to me.
>
> First, few sites use BATV.
>
> Second, BATV works perfectly fine with autoresponders that adhere
> to mail standards: a) reply to the envelope sender address, and b)
> send the reply with a null envelope sender address.
>
> I suspect that BATV also inter-operates with buggy autoresponders
> that violate both requirements a) and b): reply to an address in
> the from header, and send email with a non-null envelope sender.
>
> But BATV won't inter-operate with buggy autoresponders that violate
> only a) or b) but not both. That is a BATV feature, not a bug.
>
> Currently, your gnarwl setup falls into none of these categories
> since it changes a remote address into a local one.
>
> You can prevent address destruction by not using the gnarwl -s
> option (this means you will violate requirement a) above), but
> that won't be sufficient for BATV inter-operability unless gnarwl
> also violates the b) requirement.
>
> Wietse
Thank you Wietse for your supportive analytical understanding. Even if i didn't
get the two last points (a and b) you pointed me to one possible solution :-)
Omitting the -s parameter and it's argument forces GNARWL to read the senders
email address from the piped mail - GNARWL doesn't fail in this case and uses
the correct email address (Envelope From Header) to send its autoresponse.
In case other people experience similar problems here is my solution:
master.cf: changing the following line from ...
gnarwl unix - n n - - pipe flags=F user=vmail
argv=/usr/bin/gnarwl -a ${user} -s ${sender}
to ...
gnarwl unix - n n - - pipe flags=F user=vmail
argv=/usr/bin/gnarwl -a ${user}
.. did the job.
