Re: [Exim] Should vacation messages go to reply_address or r…

Top Page
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: Philip Hazel
Date:  
To: Kai Henningsen
CC: exim-users
Subject: Re: [Exim] Should vacation messages go to reply_address or return_path
On 19 Aug 2000, Kai Henningsen wrote:

> > I've never, ever, not once, seen '<>' appear in an automatically
> > generated RFC-822 header, especially not in a bounce, and I can't find
> > any evidence of it either in my RFC collection, nor in of my megabytes
> > of archived real e-mail.
>
> Umm, I see lots of those in my mail, coming through Exim. You're not
> looking very hard, it seems.


No, you haven't! (With the possible exception of "Return-Path:" added at
final delivery.)

It is illegal in RFC 822 to have '<>' in any of the "normal" address
header lines such as From:, To:, Cc:, etc., which is what I think was
being referred to.

-- 
Philip Hazel            University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10@???      Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.