RE: NDR From Field

2002-10-11 Thread Rob Hackney
Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 11 October 2002 14:03 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: NDR From Field Nope. By the rules (RFC 2821), all non delivery messages are to have null from addresses - <>, in order to indicate to the mailer daemon that if it can't be deliver

RE: NDR From Field

2002-10-11 Thread Roger Seielstad
ity Atlanta, GA > -Original Message- > From: Rob Hackney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 10:45 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: NDR From Field > > > I can see to whom it was sent so can fwd if necessary . If > the rfc states that

RE: NDR From Field

2002-10-14 Thread Rob Hackney
-Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 11 October 2002 18:09 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: NDR From Field The NDR should look something like: --- The original message was received at Fri, 11 Oct 2002 14:26:43 GMT

RE: NDR From Field

2002-10-11 Thread Roger Seielstad
The NDR should contain the original message to tell you to whom it was sent. NDRs are required to have null <> sender addresses. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA > ---

RE: NDR From Field

2002-10-11 Thread Roger Seielstad
ministrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA > -Original Message- > From: Stevens, Dave [mailto:StevensMD@;oro.doe.gov] > Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 9:01 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: NDR From Field > > > > I hav

RE: NDR From Field

2002-10-11 Thread Stevens, Dave
I have seen that and I assumed it was a bcc. Dave Stevens -IT Network Support- email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 865-576-8898 -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:roger.seielstad@;inovis.com] Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 8:58 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: NDR From