Author: Bill Hacker Date: To: exim-users Subject: Re: [exim] Need to generate a "reject" message with correct headers
Philip Hazel wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, Kenevel wrote:
>
>
>>Following on from this, surely the VERP section in the documentation needs
>>revisiting if setting return_path is redundant?
>
>
> I have not followed the details of this thread, but, for a message
> delivered over SMTP, you can change the return path *either* by an
> errors_to setting on a router *or* on a return_path on a transport.
> Section 44.3 chooses to describe the latter way of doing it.
>
> Why the two methods? Well, errors_to allows you to change this field for
> all cases - whatever happens to the address aftewards (be it redirected,
> delivered locally, or delivered remotely), whereas return_path allows
> you to change this field for just those deliveries that go out through
> the one particular transport.
>
It is actually quite clearly explained in the 4.5X docs.
Flexible, rather than 'redundant'.
I will take it on faith that the 4.6X docs cover it just as
well, but haven't the time to convert/index/search them to find
out ...
(ducks and runs....)
Hmmm .... how about web-alizing those 'as is' in one iFrame,
and putting the old-style 'topic/ alphabetical director' index
in the a side bar in another frame? Created by an external process?
