On 09 Apr 2003 19:52:07 -0500
wayne <wayne(_at_)midwestcs(_dot_)com> wrote:
In <8844(_dot_)1049929064(_at_)kanga(_dot_)nu> J C Lawrence
<claw(_at_)kanga(_dot_)nu> writes:
On Wed, 9 Apr 2003 18:11:29 -0400 waltdnes <waltdnes(_at_)waltdnes(_dot_)org>
wrote:
Practical question... (Theoretical types can stick their fingers in
their ears while I ask) how many MTAs (besides Qmail with
"Return-Path" headers) make this info available to the MUA ?
Exim can, but requires a non-default (at least under Debian/Linux)
configfile option.
Are you sure that this is not the default behavior under Debian/Linux?
The copy of eximconfig on my "sid" version shows return_path_add
options on the appropriate transports.
I should probably qualify my prior statement:
I clearly recall adding the return-path items to my exim.conf under
Debian/Linux roughly 3 years ago (and have comments in that file
annotating that edit). I haven't checked the current Debian exim
package.
Thanks.
And in those cases, how many MUAs would know about it ?
Proximal to zero.
Even if Debian/Linux add return-path headers by default, it wouldn't
change the answer. However, I don't know enough about other mailers
to know if "proximal to zero" is right or not.
I'm not aware of any MUAs (possible exception of GNUs, as I'm not sure
if the config I used there was custom or default) which pay attention to
added envelope headers.
--
J C Lawrence
---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas.
claw(_at_)kanga(_dot_)nu He lived as a devil, eh?
http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg