Re: [Exim] Those damned Spamassassin Headers

----- Original Message -----
From: "Giuliano Gavazzi" <eximlists@???>
To: <Terry.Shows@???>; <exim-users@???>
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 11:27 PM
Subject: Re: [Exim] Those damned Spamassassin Headers


> I do not know if you can do that in a transport, but the dnslookup
> router should be the right place for outgoing mail.

There was a suggestion on this list using a system filter earlier these
days that I'd recommend. IMHO The problem with using the dnslookup
router is that you could have more than one router that sends mail to
the outside. You'd have to repeat the strip code then, which is always
to be avoided, I believe. On the other hand, there are MACROs exactly
for this, yes...

> Now that we are talking of economy of means, wouldn't be a nice idea
> if the list software used for the exim list removed all those
> inessential Received headers?

No, I wouldn't vote for that. This is a mailing list for discussing an
MTA, so nothing destrucive should be done to any header as long as the
header doesn't harm. We're not on #talk14, if you know what I mean.

> Now you know it, I use "more" to read my email and these headers give
> me an headache... seriously, even if I do not see the Received
> headers, I do not see why we should all see all the steps that a
> message to the list took,

Again, we're talking about one of the products how writes these headers.
Would be comparable to holding a meeting for car sellers and letting
them all come by train. ;)

> they could be left for the archival copy
> kept at exim-colo-01.whoc.theplanet.co.uk (or whatever). And save a
> lot of bandwidth, if not some irony.

Wouldn't save a remarkable amount I suspect, but I don't know exactly.
Besides that, bandwidth saving is living *for* the machines, not using
them while living. If there's not enough bandwith to carry useful
information about the track of a message, then we shouldn't skip these
info but extend bandwith, of course.

Yes, bandwith abusing is a bad thing to do, so we all should now what
we're doing when sending a 60 kb HTML mail to a high volume mailing
list, but stripping 1k or whatever of worthful info does not seem the
right way, at least to me.

Btw, there are loads of email clients out there that hide unnecessary
headers by default - you don't have to stick to 'more', but you know
that, I presume. What are the reasons for using it?

Regards,

Robert