At 13:12 2003-11-30 +0200, Udi Mottelo wrote:
> CLEANFROM=|formail -IReply-To: -rtzxTo:
What about the "-t" flag in formail? Doesn't more safety to
use the envelop address?
1. When on a mailing list, the envelope address can be wholly
separate from the From:, making it a fine indicator of the
(RE)SENDER, but not of the message AUTHOR. Since I'm infinitely
more interested in the author of a message - particularly when
greenlisting or processing a TWIT filter, I want to home in on
the AUTHOR.
2. An increasing number of mailing list implementations use a
hash in the envelope address, so that when the message delivery
fails, the address to which the bounce is sent can be interpreted
in order to determine the list recipient which is bouncing. As an
admin at a discussion site where we have some 20K+ users, I can
say that it gets very frustrating when we receive some useless
bounce from a cc:Mail / Lotus Notes / MS Exchange system that
reports a translated local username as the failed recipient, or
which reports a final delivery address after a message has run
through a forwarding service (OR MULTIPLE SUCH SERVICES!)
3. I explicitly eliminate the Reply-To: header from the address
computation so that the header isn't used in the event of a list
which inserts a Reply-To header for directing replies to the list.
4. -t IS in there: -rtzxTo:
---
Sean B. Straw / Professional Software Engineering
Procmail disclaimer: <http://www.professional.org/procmail/disclaimer.html>
Please DO NOT carbon me on list replies. I'll get my copy from the list.
_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail