Date: Sun, 18 Aug 1996 00:13:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Dan Busarow <dan@dpcsys.com> To: Thomas David Rivers <ponds!rivers@dg-rtp.dg.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: Determined what's wrong with this return address (sendmail cont.) Message-ID: <Pine.UW2.3.95.960818000359.1052B-100000@cedb> In-Reply-To: <199608171848.OAA10270@lakes.water.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 17 Aug 1996, Thomas David Rivers wrote: > I've determined what's wrong with the return address > you have for this message (it should be something ponds!rivers@dg-rtp.dg.com, > but it's mostly likely nuucp@dg-rtp.dg.com.) No. Most likely what you are seeing [now, your return address has improved] is MUA's using the envelope return address rather that the From: or Reply-To: This is broken behaviour. I feed a few UUCP sites and we get bounces directed to uucp (bad MTA config) and replies to uucp (broken MUAs). The MTAs outnumber the MUAs, but both are a very, very small percentage of our UUCP traffic. I did not have to alter your address to make this reply, I did, however, have to fix the Cc: line. Dan -- Dan Busarow 714 443 4172 DPC Systems dan@dpcsys.com Dana Point, California 83 09 EF 59 E0 11 89 B4 8D 09 DB FD E1 DD 0C 82
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.UW2.3.95.960818000359.1052B-100000>