On Mon, 28 Jun 1999, Peter Galbavy wrote:
> I would like to see a MIME-wrapped failure feature. I can think of a
> number of "useful" features, but since I have not really touched the
> exim codebase, I woule not know where to start.
ph10@??? said:
> Ideas noted, but I fear Creeping Featurism...
[Muted snigger]
MIME wrapping messages ought to be pretty simple other than ensuring
that you have got a unique MIME separator. Personally I would punt on
that by making it a long randomly generated string with the exim
message id appended to it - if someone clashes with that you have just
come up with odds similar to winning the Lottery size weeks running.
hgs@??? said:
> Strong cases on both sides. I would suggest the configuration allow:
> always_mime_errors never_mime_errors mime_errors_if_needed
> mime_errors_unless_unwanted
Actually the people fussing about this are the people receiving the
bounces. These split into 2 classes - the postmaster who runs the
system, and other people. The postmaster is in a position to make a
definite decision as to how they want their bounce messages, we cannot
cater for all the whims of the rest of the world. Hence just put a
switch in for mime/non-mime bounces.
I'm wondering if there is a way of indirecting the bounce generation so
that a script or filter could be used to assemble the bounce. Maybe if
the bounces were produced by a specifically named autoreply transport,
then the transport could be overridden in the config to make a custom
bouncer by say using a pipe transport. Is there a reasonably easy way
this can be generalised to give people the hooks (or enough rope to
hang themselves)?
Nigel.
--
[ Nigel Metheringham Nigel.Metheringham@??? ]
[ Phone: +44 1423 850000 Fax +44 1423 858866 ]
--
*** Exim information can be found at
http://www.exim.org/ ***
