> On Tue, 21 Jul 1998 patl@??? wrote:
>
> > Unfortunately, the result doesn't look like a bounce message;
>
> In what way? It should have a sender address of "<>", which is what
> normally identifies bounce messages.
Sorry, I had missed that aspect of the autoreply transport. You
are quite right - it shouldn't be difficult to ensure that the
other headers, and the body text agree with the Sendmail version
well enough to match any existing filter.
Actually, I'm not really sure why I've taken this issue this far.
I'm not really that big a fan of Return-Receipt-To:. I would like
to see some sort of receipt generation become standard; but so far
I haven't seen any proposal that seemed to reasonably provide the
desired functionality without the major risk of abuse.
-Pat
--
*** Exim information can be found at
http://www.exim.org/ ***
