On Wed, 12 Feb 2003 07:47:02 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
[...]
>> if ${mask:$sender_host_address/24} is "192.168.2.0/24" then
>> headers remove Message-ID
>> headers add "Message-ID: $message_id@$primary_hostname"
>> endif
>
>Doesn't that make it quite likely that you'll end up with a Message-ID:
>with _two_ @ signs in it? Is that permitted?
No -- $message_id is the internal Exim "job number," the one you use e.g. to
remove messages from the queue. It's not a "fully-qualified" message id.
>> Is this a clever approach? Or am I overseeing something?
>
>Users might not like it. I explicitly configured MH to add Message-ID
>before sending, so that my outgoing folder had a record of the
>Message-ID of each mail sent, and I could then refer to it more easily
>-- looking for it in mailer logs, grepping for replies to it on a
>mailing list, etc.
Well, since there are only two users who use the server in question this is
not a problem. :-)
The reason why I started mucking around with message ids is that I'm
evaluating the Cygnus port of "Mutt" under Windoze 2000. Without tweaking it
would generate illegal message ids (since I only have private IPs and
hostnames inside my LAN.) I finally managed to tweak it so that it does
generate valid message ids, but I thought it might be a more clever approach
to have my mailserver generate unique and valid message ids.
--
L I N U X .~.
The Choice /V\
of a GNU /( )\
Generation ^^-^^
