On Wed, 21 Jan 1998, Sven Paulus wrote:
> Wow, nice, I like this new format (why didn't you post your ideas about
> Received erlier?
I posted them approximately one hour after I had them.
> The only case you haven't mentioned is a mail fed to exim by calling exim
> ad@ress. Are you going to use the traditional form
> Received: from user by my.host.name ...
> or to get it similiar to the other Received variations
> Received: from localhost (ident=user) by my.host.name ...
> ? (I think, I'd prefer the latter).
I wasn't planning on changing that form from the current style, which is
the first of those.
> Another thing (I sent you mail about it a few days ago): How will the
> Received look like when mail is received via exim -bs/-bS and the batch
> includes a HELO-line (you don't have a IP-address in this case):
> Received: from localhost (helo=x.y.z ident=user)
> where user is the local user calling exim?
Currently for both -bs and -bS the Received line looks the same as for
local messages input with "exim ad@ress". It will say "from xxx", where
xxx is the user who ran Exim (e.g. "from uucp"). However, it will also
say "with local-smtp" instead of "with local".
I have made a note to think about possibly including the contents of the
HELO data if there is any in this case.
--
Philip Hazel University Computing Service,
ph10@??? New Museums Site, Cambridge CB2 3QG,
P.Hazel@??? England. Phone: +44 1223 334714
--
*** Exim information can be found at
http://www.exim.org/ ***
