Okay, Here's what I've just tried...
I've tried it without TMDA in there, and here's the headers I get through the mail system: Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=pinky.notnet.co.uk) by gateway.home.gotworms.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18a6Ax-0003sG-00 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sun, 19 Jan 2003 03:31:11 +0000 Received: from [81.91.102.5] (helo=mail.anlx.net) by pinky.notnet.co.uk with esmtp (TLSv1:EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA:168) id 18a61q-0001vw-00 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Sun, 19 Jan 2003 03:21:46 +0000 Received: from www.funmail.co.uk ([212.62.7.9] helo=mx.another.com) by mail.anlx.net with smtp id 18a5zC-00072K-00 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Sun, 19 Jan 2003 03:19:02 +0000 Received: (qmail 17424 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2003 03:20:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO www-a25) (172.16.100.25) by qm-a01 with SMTP; 19 Jan 2003 03:20:14 -0000 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 03:20:53 +0000 (GMT) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mime-Version: 1.0 so it appears that fetchmail is not molesting stuff as previously thought... Any Ideas? brain is slowly dribbling out my ear... -- RIchard _____________________________________________ tmda-users mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-users
