Hi Magnusm
Am Mittwoch, 22. Nov 2006, 00:24:37 +0100 schrieb Magnus Holmgren:
> On Tuesday 21 November 2006 21:12, Bertram Scharpf wrote:
> > begin rewrite
> >
> > *@* "(--) $header_from: , $h_from: , $header_from , $h_from (--)" Fs
> >
> > Debug output:
> > 20:23:28 21804 user@??? in "*@*"? yes (matched
> > "*@*") 20:23:28 21804 expanding: (--) $header_from: , $h_from: ,
> > $header_from , $h_from (--) 20:23:28 21804 result: (--) , , , (--)
> > The header field "From:" is definitely _NOT_ empty. So why
> > the variable is? What have I to say instead?
> "If, however, the sender address is verified in the ACL, it is rewritten
> before verification, and remains rewritten thereafter."
The whole section 31. does not contain a string /header_/
anywhere. Shouldn't your next sentence be mentioned in 31.2?
> So if you verify the sender address, it's rewritten before the body is read
> and any $header_ variables are set. More debug context is needed to say if
> that is the reason, though.
That was it. Now, routing works. This encourages me to
experiment further with transports rewrite rules.
Thank you very, very, very much. I searched so long for
this.
Bertram
--
Bertram Scharpf
Stuttgart, Deutschland/Germany
http://www.bertram-scharpf.de
