procmail
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Broken mass mailings - Delivered-To: issue

2010-01-08 12:35:57
The simple background to this problem is that mail delivery has worked
as it should for literally years.  And then the wheels fell off about
three days ago. 

While it's possible this is an MTA (sendmail here) issue, I have no idea
what caused the problem.  That is, I haven't made any changes to
sendmail or to procmail (if it ain't broke, don't fix it).  Of course,
there's a chance that a maintenance update has broken things. 

The idea was to use procmailrc to work around the problem: if there's a
Delivered-To: valid-user, then send it to that user.  Ugly and brute
force, I agree, but I'll take "works" over "elegant" right now. 

Most of the mass mailings we see do use To: and all is well with them. 
However, at least three sources rely on Delivered-To:; I'm not likely to
get Google, Yahoo, or the US Coast Guard to revamp their mailing
processes to suit me. 

See my follow-on note with log excerpts for more details.  I didn't want
to flood the list with them in an initial note if, in fact, I was asking
a common FAQ topic question. 

Cheers,
Rick Emerson

Professional Software Engineering wrote:
At 22:39 2010-01-07 -0500, Richard B. Emerson wrote:
Several mass mailings have suddenly stopped working here.  Instead of
going to username(_at_)pinefields(_dot_)com, they are going to
postmaster(_at_)pinefields(_dot_)com(_dot_)  The maings originate with 
Google, Yahoo, and
other groups, not from just one source.

Sounds rather like an MTA problem.  What does your mail.log have to
say about it?

There is a Delivered-To: field with a valid address.  Attempts to
brute force the mailings to the correct address, by tweaking
procmailrc, have failed miserably.

Do your procmail recipies attempt to deliver mail based on ^TO, like:

:0:
^TOsomeuser
someuser.mbx

If so, you should be aware that Delivered-To: isn't matched with that
regexp macro, so it won't matter if there is a Delivered-To: header
that shows the address.  IIRC, Delivered-To: is not specified in ANY
RFC or internet standard.

Help!

You don't provide ANY relevant log excerpts or procmail code.  Any
help you might get is going to be pure conjecture.

---
 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 homepage: http://www.procmail.org/
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)de
http://mailman.rwth-aachen.de/mailman/listinfo/procmail


____________________________________________________________
procmail mailing list   Procmail homepage: http://www.procmail.org/
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)de
http://mailman.rwth-aachen.de/mailman/listinfo/procmail

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>