>yes, they want this email - it is a confirmation of their transaction You still didn't answer me re: what kind they're requesting. Both types are tricky devils.
DSNs are RFC-standardized and are generated by servers' Postmaster (<>) accounts, but the process of requesting one is tricky. The otherwise-deprecated Return-Receipt-Requested: header is often interpreted as a DSN request by servers that support DSNs. MDNs can be even harder to track down; they are to be sent out from mail clients, but are not subject to any one RFC. Though the Disposition-Notification-To: header is usually treated as an MDN request, the format for the outgoing MDN varies a lot. You need to look at an incoming message with the receipt request in it and look for the relevant header. Then you also need to look at the full source of a receipt that does make it out--or, if necessary, in the outbox before it's sent--to make sure the MUA isn't futzing with the headers in any way (i.e. truncating or munging the To: address). Many MUAs don't even put MDNs in Sent Items so you can look at 'em, which I think is very poor design. A possible roadblock in a different area is DSNs erroneously sent out from <MAILER-DAEMON>, which is not a guaranteed-acceptable MAIL FROM: for servers that do sender verification. The null (<>) sender is always acceptable, as is <Postmaster>, but other unqualified senders do not need to be accepted...ironically, perhaps, the reason servers send out from <MAILER-DAEMON> is usually as a "safety measure" in case badly configured remote servers reject <>, but the failsafe ends up being the exact opposite! Sandy Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html to be removed from this list. An Archive of this list is available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
