Re: [EXIM] headers including envelope address ?

Pàgina inicial
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Autor: Philip Hazel
Data:  
A: exim-users
Assumpte: Re: [EXIM] headers including envelope address ?
On Tue, 20 Jan 1998, Peter Radcliffe wrote:

> I noticed a difference in the headers between our sendmail boxen and the
> exim boxen - when relaying/sending out remote messages the sendmail boxes
> put the address they are relaying for/sending to in the received: header:
>
> Received: from boxone.domain (root@??? [xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx])
>         by boxtwo.domain (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA14886
>         for <user@domain>; Tue, 20 Jan 1998 14:22:25 -0500 (EST)

>
> I find this useful for tracking which address a message actually got sent
> to if I was bcc:ed or it was spam and the to: header is rubbish, since
> I have quite a few aliases pointing to the same account which are bounced
> through external relays.
>
> I tried to add this to my received_header_text:
> received_header_text = "Received: \
> ${if def:sender_fullhost {from ${sender_fullhost} \
> ${if def:sender_ident {(${sender_ident})}}\n\t}\
> {${if def:sender_ident {from ${sender_ident} }}}}\
> by ${primary_hostname} \
> ${if def:received_protocol {with ${received_protocol}}} \
> (Exim)\n\t\
> id ${message_id} for <${user}@${domain}>"
>
> but $user} and ${domain} appear to be empty at this point (I just got
> "... for <@>").


Yes, well, a message is allowed to have many recipients. That is why
$local_part and $domain are not set at this point.

If you put all recipients into the Received header, then they are all
revealed to all recipients, which is not what is wanted when Bcc
recipients are involved. (I believe Sendmail does this only if there is
just one recipient address.)

The envelope address information at final delivery is provided by Exim
in the Envelope-To header, which it adds per delivery. The option
envelope_to_add is on by default for appendfile, and off for pipe (can't
remember quite why this choice was made).

> I was just wondering if there is a reason for this, and if it could be
> added to the wish list if its reasonable ...


I have made a note to think about this in the case of a single envelope
addressee, as I can see it is potentially useful for sticking in the
Received header by an intermediate MTA.

-- 
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/ ***