Re: HELP: Can't send via Mail.app on NeXT
Bob Rogers [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: Hi. This is the qmail-send program at hotspur.psych.yorku.ca. I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses. This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out. Georges Monette [EMAIL PROTECTED]: ~~ ~ Sorry, I couldn't find any host named mathstat.yorku.ca. (#5.1.2) You don't have the address in the envelope recipient but the whole from header. That's wrong. Claus -- http://www.faerber.muc.de
Re: rcpthosts and morercpthosts
Greg Kopp [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: 1. What is morerecpthosts and morercpthosts.cdb? Is there a limit to the number of hosts that can be in the rcpthosts file? morerecpthosts[.cdb] is a binary format that is more efficient than a single text file. You should use it for performance reason if you have more than a couple of domains. 2. Do you think it would be safe to use NFS to mount my /var/qmail/control directory on our backup MX and then use symlinks of the nfs mounted rcpthosts file to the local file? Absolutly not. If your primary MX goes down for any reason that also affects the NFS service, the backup won't work either. Better replicate the files regularily. Claus -- http://www.faerber.muc.de
Re: VERP RFC
John White [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: Actually, you can use the user-@domain-@[] format when talking to qmail-smtpd, and the VERP expansion will be handled. I'd call that a bug. -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: HELO in
A. Yahya Sjarifuddin [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: Is there any incomptability with Lotus or just wrong setting? Thanks for any help. [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Connected to 202.103.147.133 but sender was rejected. Remote host said: 500 Session already established. The domain name [smtp-a.cbn.net.id] passed in with HELO will be ignored. The current domain name of sending SMTP is [www.wtwh.com.cn]. The software that produced this error message is not SMTP-compliant. Tell them to use software that conforms to accepted internet standard if they want to receive email. -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: Doubts: qmail and IMAP
Gilberto Rodrigues [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: 1. I'm following the BUILD doc and according to it, I should install the pop2d, pop3d and imapd daemons in a system directory of my choosing. Is it necessary to install the pop2d and pop3d daemons? What are they for? Must all of them be running even if I wanna have only IMAP protocol? Of course not. 2. According to the docs, I should update inetd.conf to invoke the daemons. I guess I could use tcpserver instead of editing it. Is it correct? Does IMAP daemon have to appear before qmail's dameons in init scripts? No, it does not matter: qmail can run without imapd and vice-versa. They can even be on different machines (if the maildir is mounted in some way on both). -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: Understanding To and From
Dave Kitabjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote:
When connecting to the SMTP server to send the message, the "From" and
"To" fields are copied by the MUA to become the "From:" and "To:"
headers of the message.
The "fields" are the "headers" -- the term used in email is "header
fields" for a "single header" and "header" for the complete list of
header fields.
Besides these header fields, there is an envelope, consisting of an
envelope sender (aka return path) and one or more envelope recipients.
The envelope is completly separate from the header fields and can
contain different addresses.
With SMTP, the envelope is transmitted with the MAIL FROM and RCPT TO
commands. With UUCP, it's the argument to rmail and "From " lines added
to the start of a messages[1]. QMTP uses a binary format.
For message delivery and bouncing, only the envelope is used.
When a user agent hands over a message to the message transfer agent
(injects it), it must already have prepared the envelope and the message
(which consists of headers and body). From that point, there's no
relation between envelope and message header.
User agents usually ask the user to give information for the header
fields and prepare the envelope out of that information, but that is not
necessarily true. BTW, qmail-inject is more or less part of the user
agent -- or can be used directly by users.[2]
The "From" field is also used in the SMTP conversation as the "MAIL
FROM:".
Not necessarily, see above.
Then, all addresses in the "To",
("Cc",) and "Bcc" fields are used as SMTP "RCPT TO:" entries.
Not necessarily, see above.
- Question: Are "Bcc" recipients not stored anywhere in the headers, or
are they stored in the headers until the message is ready to be
delivered into the recipients box, and then stripped off?
Depending on the user agent, the Bcc recipients might be stored in the
header until the user agent prepares the message for submission. At this
moment, it creates the envelope and (hopefully) strips out the Bcc
header.
Note that the other possibility would be very stupid as noone can
guarantee that it will be stripped out by a non-trusted receiving
message delivery agent.
(If they are NOT stored in the headers, where does qmail store them?)
As in any other MTA that deserves that name, the envelope addresses are
stored separatly.
The "Reply-To" header is created by the MUA from either the "Reply
Address" field, if present, or else the "From" field.
No. The "Reply Address" field is more or less the Reply-To header. If
you don't give one, there simply is no Reply-To header field either.
The "Return-Path:" header is added by the SMTP server based on the
"Reply-To" or "From" header (?)
No. The Return-Path header is added by _some_ agents that finally store
a message in a mailbox/maildir (delivery agents) It is a copy from the
envelope sender, which would otherwise be lost at this moment.
Also, _some_ delivery agents write a Delivered-To header to save the
very envelope recipient address used for this copy of the message. It
would otherwise be lost too.
- Question: So, now what do we look at to determine the "envelope
sender" and "envelope recipient"?
At the envelope, which is stored separatly from the message headers and
body.
Secondly, which of these terms/headers
is used to determine whom qmail delivers the message to?
qmail sends the message to the envelope recipients of course. No sane
message transfer agent would look at the headers.
Okay, now the message bounces because because it's an evil spam message.
- Question: Where does MAILER-DAEMON send the bounce message? To the
"From:" person? "Reply-To:"?
To the envelope sender of course (as said above). And not that bounce
message have a envelope sender address of (ie empty), not MAILER-
DAEMON@host, which is only the From header.
___
[1] Which is quite different from the "From:" header field.
[2] Although it comes with qmail, it does part of the UA's job of
preparing a message. You could also see it as the interface between the
UA and the MTA.
--
Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de
PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: Unknown recipients
Bruno Wolff III [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: If your goal is to get rid of spam double bounces, you don't have to get the list exactly right. You just accept stuff for valid_user, valid_user-.* and names defined in ~alias. This does not work with invalid addresses for virtual domains: If a mail is sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED], which is handled by user-virtual, you have to know whether ~user/.qmail-virtual-invalid exists. -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: Unknown recipients
Petr Novotny [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: Correction: It would be better if it was for free. Unfortunately, checking whether a username exists (against large database) can be arbitrarily slow; unless you're planning to overload your busy box, forget it; qmail-smtpd just carries on the conversation, qmail-queue writes down the message, fsync()es it and you're done. Well, it depends: If you end up accepting too much mail to invalid addresses, checking in advance is cheaper than sending out many bounces. If you only receive a few messages with bogous destinations, validating the address for all mails has probably a higher cost. It also depends on the speed of the machine and the bandwith its connection to the Internet has. -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: Unknown recipients
Anand Buddhdev [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: No there isn't. qmail's design is such that it does no recipient verification when accepting an email. I wish there were some way to do this though. Perhaps qmail-smtpd can look up a file list users/assign. Well, the question here is, what's better: A security hole allowing remote attackers to find out which email address is valid without waiting for the bounce (and giving a valid return address in advance) or a security hole allowing remote attackers to start a DoS attack by sending messages which eventually double bounce? I believe it's better not to accept that mail in the first place. Unfortunatly, qmail-smtpd has absolutly no access to the list of valid addresses, maybe not even users. I have spent some thinking about this and ended up with the following idea: A separate daemon validating addresses by looking if there is a .qmail file or a default action for that address (and maybe caching the results). Of course, if you need ~alias/.qmail-default, this would not help. Further, to check whether a .qmail file for .qmail-user-anything exists, you would have to start a process with this user's id to be able to read the directory... -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: SMTP problem
Andreas Altenburg [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: Why is the connection refused? Do I have to configuer tecpserver?? Yes. (Or any other server that accepts connections and starts qmail- smtpd.) -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: Qmail Security
David Anso [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: I was reading the FAQ that came with qmail and noticed the following: "Security note: pop3d should be used only within a secure network otherwise an eavesdropper can steal passwords." I am looking to move my qmail server out onto the big wide internet, so should I be using another pop or imap service which is more secure? Any suggestions? It's the protocol that's insecure, not qmail's pop3 daemon (although some pop3ds implement authentication methods with higher security iff client applications support that). So you're actually asking whether to use other pop3ds/imapds whose authors don't tell you about the poor security. -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: Maildir format
Bruce Guenter [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: First place to start is to figure out what is actually necessary. In a lot of cases, POP3 with a few extensions should be perfectly adequate, but it is necessary to know what the needs actually are. I don't think it's a good idea to overload the POP3, which is a last- step _delivery_ protocol with mailbox access. The needs I am aware of include: - the basics of POP3 plus... No, I'd rather start with IMAP, but leave out: . the requirement that persistent IDs must be numeric and subsequent (just use opaque strings instead), . the very complex syntax, . response fields that are filled in from header fields (instead pass the header fields raw to the client), . the variable hierarchy delimiters (instead, use iURL syntax with %- encoding). Some simplicifations and changes: . Instead of namespaces, have "mailboxes" which then have certain types, . have special folders labelled with out-of-band data for each mailbox. I.e., don't have a folder "inbox", but an unnamed folder which has the function inbox. Same for other commonly used folders such as sent, templates, unsent, drafts etc. The name of that folder is left to the UA programmers. So you would have user folders and "special" folders. Some additional features that would be nice: . regexp search, search for message id. . server-side filering (optional) . sending of email (yes!) . Storage of metadata such as user name etc. -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: 7 bit ascii qmail
Sam [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: Matthew Brown writes: The difference is that sendmail makes a halfhearted attempt at compliance, and qmail doesn't. Agreed. Now, which one would you rather have? Well, it would be nice if qmail was fully compliant here (although I don't like that standard). So qmail should convert a message to quoted-printable iff necessary. Anything else is dangerous and bad. But I certainly don't want a programme that does so many dangerous transformations as sendmail. -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: Anal-ness
David Cunningham [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: Would this license also prohibit me from modifying the source for my own personal use (not for redistribution?) No. Also, distributing patches is allowed. -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: Bounce messages to sender, not me
Joel Shellman [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: How do I set the "user part of the envelope sender" in the CGI script? man qmail-inject -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: Sendmail vs Qmail?
Sam [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: You want to hand-hold all the PHBs who can barely put together a Powerpoint presentation, and tell them how to install a unix filter? Why don't you tell them to get a proper mail user agent? Throwing away email is not really the MTA's task. -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: Shadow Password and checkpassword
Ng Hak Beng [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: After looking through the archive, is checkpassword able to authenticate shadow passwords? I've got a RH 6 box running qmail, but I don't seem to be able to authenticate through pop3. Yes, it works with shadow passwords. Have you installed checkpassword (which is aspearate package) and checked all programme paths and paramters? -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: getting qmail to retry
Phil Howard [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: I understand that it is a permanent failure code. But clearly a full mailbox is not a true permanent situation. Usually, this is upon the receiving MTA to decide. If it thinks that it is not really permanent, it will send a 452 response instead of 552. What I was looking for is if there was a table of response codes and how to act when receiving them. Because of scattered documentation for qmail that means I haven't yet found everything, ... Well, if you write or modify an implementation of a protocol, you should read and understand the protocol specification. For SMTP, this is RFC 821 and ist designated successor draft-ietf-drums- smtpup-10.txt: ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc821.txt http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-drums-smtpud-10.txt And yes, you will have to hack qmail-remote for this. -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: Sqwebmail and IMAP
Sam [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: Then what you will have to ask yourself is whether you want all your folders shared by every one of your incoming maildirs. I could consider the proposal of storing all folders in ../Mail, however what I don't like about this approach is that you're now in conflict with your mail apps who use $HOME/Mail to store traditional mailbox-file folders. Which, when patched, will look for and store maildirs there, won't they? And if you do use maildirs, all of your MUAs should be able to handle maildirs or you won'tbe able to access your messages no matter where you store them. If you think of maildirs as an alternative to the mailbox _file_ format, ~/Mail/ is the obvious solution. For folders that should contain both messages and subdirs, you could create a subdirectory named ".default" to hold messages that look as if they were stored in the parent folder. This is compatible with MUAs that don't expect to see subfolders in maildirs (such as mutt). If you then fake a link from ~/Mail/.default/ or ~/Mail/INBOX/ (depends on the protocol you're using/implementing) to $MAILDIR, you have a complete hierarchical namespace. -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: dot before @
Andre Oppermann [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: Who is wrong now? qmail for quoting the local part (which is legal AFAIK) or is it Netscape's Messaging Server for not decoding the quoted local part? It's Netscape again. Local parts that are not dot-atom strings (which can't start or end with a dot) must be encoded, which qmail does correctly. A server not accepting local-parts in encoded form is seriously broken. -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: getting qmail to retry
Sam [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: On 11 Oct 1999, ([ISO-8859-1] Claus Färber) wrote: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-drums-smtpud-10.txt That draft doesn't exist. http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-drums-smtpupd-10.txt ^ Sorry, mistyped the URI. On second thought, I really don't want to know what these people want to do with SMTP. Ugh, what a frightening thought... It's not a new version of SMTP if that is what you're afraid of. It only collects some important extensions (such as Extended SMTP/EHLO) and clarifications. -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: Sqwebmail and IMAP
Sam [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: And how would you propose handling a virtual mailbox farm, mailboxes that have no dedicated system userid assigned to them? It's not exactly obvious, is it? Where would you put mailbox files then? Simply put your maildirs there. This is no less obvious if you consider maildirs a replacement for mbox files. Most MUAs are now using IMAP, so this is quickly becoming irrelevant. Then simply do whatever your imapd does and don't worry about compatibility. On the other hand, maybe there are different IMAP servers, web gateways etc. that should use the same strucutre. In other words: Why use an incompatible format if you can use one that is already there? No longer relevant. Any MUA worth its salt is capable of using IMAP, right now, no matter how ugly IMAP really is. So, all you have to do is standardize on an IMAP server, Yes, and the best solution IMO is to use the "standard" that has already been set by user agents. -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: dot before @
Brad Shelton [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: BTW, the time on your workstation looks pretty wrong, almost 19 hours behind. More like 13 hours. Well, exactly time-of-day hours. (My UA is configured to always send 00:00:00 - for privacy reasons.) -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: Sqwebmail and IMAP
Russell Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: Most MUAs are now using IMAP, so this is quickly becoming irrelevant. IMAP is not appropriate for an ISP, because the ISP wants to get rid of the email. Depends on the ISP. Some ISPs consider that additional value and do even provide Webmail -- or mutt over ssh. ;-) -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: qmail as secondary MX
deden purnamahadi [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: - Transcript of session follows - ... while talking to gemini.uninet.net.id.: RCPT To:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 571 [EMAIL PROTECTED]... we do not relay Gemini does not know that it is supposed to accept mail for uninet.net.id. With qmail, you would have to add uninet.net.id to your rcpthosts. For sendmail, read its documentation. -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: Question
Tony Wade [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: in an alias .qmail-ticket i have the following |/usr/lib/sendmail -f ticket-owner [EMAIL PROTECTED] Does Qmail know how to handle this. If not what would i use ? qmail does handle this, but the better solution would be to just create .qmail-ticket-owner and put only the new recipient address in .qmail- ticket. -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: qmail as secondary MX
Petr Novotny [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: That's not what secondary is for. You don't deliver on secondary - you just keep it in queue till primary comes up. On the secondary, put the domain in rcpthosts and NOT in locals nor virtualdomains. but maybe in smtproutes to prevent further MX lookups. -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: Why virtualdomains?
Dave Kitabjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: What is "virtual" about a "virtualdomain"? That qmail does not handle it as a domain but maps it to a user. -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: isocor the fastest?
Victor Tavares [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: I know that qmail is really fast. Does anyone know/guess what makes Isocor's products "the fastest Internet messaging server in the world" while remaining "extremely hardware efficient"? Hm, I guess comparision to sendmail and other full-bloated MTAs and ignorance of qmail. On the other hand, you could certainly speed up a qmail clone at the cost of security and reliability. More hardware would be cheaper, however. ;-) -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: Recording the envelope-from in Received: line
Jos Backus [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: With sendmail and Postfix (or so I've heard) it is possible to record the envelope-from address in the Received: line. This is deemed useful by my colleagues for tracing mails trough broken e-mail gateways. Well, qmail never changes the envelope sender. You can tell that your colleagues; qmail will alway add an additional Received line starting with "(qmail invoked by xyz)", so it can be easily spotted within received lines. On the other hand, patching the relevant code in qmail should be easy. -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: Mailer-daemon returns full message
Jan Stanik [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: Is it true, that qmail first received full message and then checks if it is deliverable? Is there any patch, or I am stupid and I need to patch myself? Well, the problem is that qmail-smtpd does not alway know which (local) addresses will be deliverable. Only qmail-send, qmail-lwspan and -local have the permission to check for the existance of users, impersonate that user (or alias) and check whether the address is deliverable. Changing this without compromising qmail's security model is not trivial. -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: ANNOUNCE: /var/qmail/control/locals and regex
Robert Sander [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: Yes, that is possible, but then I have to setup a user piffle, and his .qmail file has to filter the mailadresses and deliver the mail to the correct local user. I think this is too much work and a kind of inconsistency. Much of work? All you have to do is (untested): controls/virtualdomains: .example.com:alias-piffle alias/.qmail-default: |forward "$DEFAULT" (Yes, that's less work than applying a patch!) Inconsistent? Maybe. -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: question
sean [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: Is there an a means by which I can reject mail from or is there any problems associated with this? Delivery failure reports are required by messaging standards to come from . If you block it you will never know when messages sent by you can not be delivered. -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Re: Return Receipts
Russell Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb/wrote: What's wrong with having a program which acts on Netscape's "Disposition-Notification-To: sampRFC822-address/samp" ? It could be included in a .qmail file similar to qreceipt. I think it would be easier to add it to qreceipt. On the other hand, why bother? None of the receipt-request headers does actually work reliably and I don't think many people have added qrecepit to their .qmail files. I think it's better to stick with RFC 1891 ff. and UA-side MDNs (Message Disposition Notices). The first one will only work if every MTA supports it, but at least the last supporting MTA will send you a notice. MDNs give you a notice of what happened to the message after delivery. -- Claus Andre Faerber http://www.faerber.muc.de PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E 25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
