Ignore the last mail!! For some reason my mail-client decided to resurrect some old mails and put them in the outboks ;-(
--S�ren On Friday 26 March 2004 11:29, Soren Hilmer wrote: > Hi Noel, > > Yes, we did get the DSNBounce mailet from Andreas, there is a few reasons > why I have not committed it. > > i) It does not compile under 1.3 because: > a) Uses Java's regular expressions (have fixed that) > b) Uses InetAddress.getCanonicalHostName (I am still deciding on how > this is best handled, either close your eyes and use getHostName, or extend > and use our DNSServer). > > ii) It uses text/plain instead of message/delivery-status as Content-type > for the dsn message. This should be easy to resolve, given Steve Brewin's > code. > > > I then decided that splitting the commit up, so the bounceprocessing > feature was separately comitted to RemoteDelivery made sense, at least that > way developers have the hook they need to do custom bounceprocessing. > > > --S�ren > > On Friday 26 March 2004 06:20, Noel J. Bergman wrote: > > Serge, Soren and Andreas, > > > > Soren just committed the change with Serge's modifications. Did we ever > > get the DSNBounce Mailet? > > > > Reviewing the change change, two things occur to me: > > > > 1 - there is a "bug" -- actually more of a limitation. > > Quoting RFC 3464: > > > > A DSN can be used to notify the sender of a > > message of any of several conditions: failed > > delivery, delayed delivery, successful delivery, > > or the gatewaying of a message into an environment > > that may not support DSNs. > > > > The patch handles only bounces and not other types > > of Delivery Status Notification types. > > > > 2 - It seems to me that the original DSN (as in Delivery Status > > Notification) seems more general than "Bounce." I would > > change delivery-error to delivery-status. The processor > > could be ... <notificationProcessor> ?? Just to prepare > > for when we do support more than just error notices. > > > > I have not made any change for either. Would consider changing for #2, > > and would not want to touch #1 until post release, although if someone > > else has the time, please feel free to look into it. > > > > By the way, due to an error on my part (failing to do a cvs up before a > > build), this change did NOT make it into a16. It will be in a17. > > > > --- Noel > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Serge Knystautas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 22:21 > > To: James Developers List > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] RemoteDelivery and new DSNBounce Mailet > > > > > > Andreas, > > > > Two things... > > 1. You only attached the RemoteDelivery patch, not the DSNBounce mailet. > > 2. The change to remote delivery... other people have requested handling > > how bounces work, so I might suggest we make this more generic. > > Basically the code would stay the same, just remove the DSN-specific > > naming, e.g., configure a <bounceProcessor> and store the exception as > > the delivery-error. > > > > -- > > Serge Knystautas > > President > > Lokitech >>> software . strategy . design >> http://www.lokitech.com > > p. 301.656.5501 > > e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Andreas G�ggerle wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > finaly I got time to get things ready. > > > > > > This Patch to RemoteDelivery introduces a new parameter <dsnProcessor>. > > > Here you can specify a processor, where DSN conform Bounces are > > > created. If this parameter is missing, mails get bounced the "old way". > > > > > > Here is a configuration example: > > > > > > <processor name="transport"> > > > [...] > > > <mailet match="All" class="RemoteDelivery"> > > > [...] > > > <!-- Processor for DSN creation --> > > > <dsnProcessor>dsn</dsnProcessor> > > > </mailet> > > > </processor> > > > > > > <processor name="dsn"> > > > <mailet match="All" class="DSNBounce"> > > > <!-- sender defaults to postmaster --> > > > <sender> [EMAIL PROTECTED] </sender> > > > <!-- Subject Prefix (default=Re:) --> > > > <prefix> ERROR: </prefix> > > > <passThrough> false </passThrough> > > > </mailet> > > > </processor> > > > > > > The DSNBounce Mailet creates Bounce Mails in the format specified by > > > RFCs 3462 > > > to 3464. There is only one discrepancy: the MIME-type "text/plain" is > > > used for > > > the status-report part, instead of "message/delivery-status". > > > JavaMail doesn't support "message/delivery-status". > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- S�ren Hilmer, M.Sc. R&D manager Phone: +45 70 27 64 00 TietoEnator IT+ A/S Fax: +45 70 27 64 40 Ved Lunden 12 Direct: +45 87 46 64 57 DK-8230 �byh�j Email: soren.hilmer <at> tietoenator.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
