Re: Received: headers after LMTP delivery

OBATA Akio wrote: > > On Friday 17 January 2003 11:35, Scott Adkins wrote: > > --On Thursday, January 16, 2003 4:25 PM -0500 Ken Murchison > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > It already does (as of 2.1.0). Take a look at the headers from your > > > post: > > > > Ah, of course, version 2.1.

Re: Received: headers after LMTP delivery

On Friday 17 January 2003 11:35, Scott Adkins wrote: > --On Thursday, January 16, 2003 4:25 PM -0500 Ken Murchison > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It already does (as of 2.1.0). Take a look at the headers from your > > post: > > Ah, of course, version 2.1.0 :) > > > Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECT

Re: Received: headers after LMTP delivery

--On Thursday, January 16, 2003 4:25 PM -0500 Ken Murchison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: It already does (as of 2.1.0). Take a look at the headers from your post: Ah, of course, version 2.1.0 :) Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from mx3.andrew.cmu.edu (MX3.andrew.cmu.edu [128.2.10.11

Re: Received: headers after LMTP delivery

Scott Adkins wrote: > > I find it useful to look at the Received headers to track the path the > email might have taken to get from the desktop to the mailbox when we > are having problems. Particularly, I look at the delays between hops > to find out if one of our machines is holding onto mail

Received: headers after LMTP delivery

I find it useful to look at the Received headers to track the path the email might have taken to get from the desktop to the mailbox when we are having problems. Particularly, I look at the delays between hops to find out if one of our machines is holding onto mail a lot longer than it should be.