The message-ID that mail-relay.mediamonks.net added was: <200110110735406.SM01112@kenny>
I now let PHP add a message ID in the form of: <0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and the warning is gone! Why would declude mark the first one as poor? -- Regards, Terrence Koeman Technical Director/Administrator MediaMonks B.V. (www.mediamonks.nl) Please quote all replies in correspondence. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Terrence Koeman > Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 06:53 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Poor headers decode please > > > That's weird, the php script sends the mail through > mail-relay.mediamonks.net (Imail 7.04), which doesn't have declude on it. > Then the mail is delivered to mail.mediamonks.net (Imail 7.04), which has > declude installed. mail.mediamonks.net adds the warning. > > As I understand it mail-relay.mediamonks.net should've already added the > Message-ID header before it was passed to declude on mail.mediamonks.net. > > And maybe someone on this list knows how to generate a Message-ID in php? > > -- > Regards, > > Terrence Koeman > > Technical Director/Administrator > MediaMonks B.V. (www.mediamonks.nl) > > Please quote all replies in correspondence. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry > > Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 18:07 > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Poor headers decode please > > > > > > > > >I'm creating a php script to mail some stuff, but declude tags > > the e-mails > > >sent by this script with 'poor headers'. > > > > > >Could you tell me what's wrong? The header is: "X-RBL-Warning: poor > > >headers [40000203]". > > > > The problem is that the PHP script is not including a Message-ID: > header, > > which will trigger the Declude SPAMHEADERS test. > > > > The Message-ID: is not required in order for an E-mail to be > > valid, but the > > RFCs say that it "SHOULD" be there. "SHOULD" in RFC terminology > > means that > > the header must be there *unless* there is a good reason for it not to > be > > there, and the consequences of it not being there are known. I > > can't think > > of a good reason for the Message-ID: header not to be present > > (except that > > it saves programming time). The consequences of not having a > Message-ID: > > header is that the mail may or may not be delivered if it is missing. > > > > FYI, IMail does add a Message-ID: header if there isn't one > > already (since > > IMail knows the importance of the header). So, even though you > > see one, it > > was added by IMail. > > -Scott > > > > --- > > > > This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To > > unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and > > type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". You can E-mail > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] for assistance. You can visit our web > > site at http://www.declude.com . > > >
smime.p7s
Description: application/pkcs7-signature
