On 13/04/16 11:12, Heiko Schlittermann wrote:
> Evgeniy Berdnikov <bd4@???> (Mi 13 Apr 2016 12:08:40 CEST):
> …
>> In the case of bounce, which is internally generated message, I'd like to
>> do everything possible to have it passed and delivered. If bounce is not
>> properly formatted, it's not good, yes. But if lost, it's a real trouble.
>
> I agree. But sending bounces that break the rules isn't a solution. They
> may be lost somewhere else. If they're lost on your system, you should
> see at least some trace.
>
> I can imagine an option to force proper formatting of the message that
> is included in the bounce. I'm not sure if this was discussed already.
>
> a) cut the overlong lines and add some note for the recipient
> b) convert the to-be-bounced message body to some MIME format
It's feasible... but you're _modifying_ the message that you're
claiming to be including in this bounce. I suspect we'd want to
be quite careful with the boilerplate wrapping the inclusion, to
make this clear.
And of course you're adding complexity and bugs.
And if you remove the check at the smtp-transport stage, you
need to think about how to deal with command-line sourced messages
that will be sent outbound via smtp.
--
Cheers,
Jeremy
