I've redirected your message on the projects' dev listserv, since as a general rule, authors don't like to be contacted directly (if they have the time and interest still, they'll be on the listserv.) As for your question, James does currently require the FROM address. This was an early design flaw (by me) that we haven't yet addressed. It is systemic since much of the code is expecting a FROM address, and it is hard to determine which code needs to change. It's also unclear of the best way to support this... a sender is required to put MAIL FROM: <> (the command is required) and this is in effect a special-case email address. Rather than allowing a null value for the sender, it might be better to classify this as a special constant email address. How exactly to code and support this is also unclear. If you have suggestions on how to address this, I would encourage you to continue this discussion on this listserv. Serge Knystautas Loki Technologies http://www.lokitech.com/ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Gulbronson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 8:19 PM Subject: JAMES::SMTPHandler You guys are credited with being the authors of the SMTPHandler class in the latest build of the Apache JAMES server. I've looked for FAQs, etc., but could not find anything to answer my question. So... I'm turning to you for your thoughts. In a nutshell, I am using JAMES as a layer between our internal email environment and a relational database-driven web application. It provides some really handy hooks for workflow engines, etc., and I can see the use of JAMES exploding in our environment if I can prove its stability. Everything works perfectly, except.... We would very much like to use JAMES to handle "undeliverable" messages from our Exchange servers. The problem is, they are returned to JAMES with an SMTP wrapper that omits the FROM attribute (technically, it is there, but it is empty "<>"). Apparently, according to our email gurus, the FROM attribute is optional in SMTP, and email clients should default to the MIME content FROM header when the SMTP header is omitted or empty. I'm hoping you can give me a little guidance, or at least a suggestion for dealing with this. Is it something that could/should be allowed in the JAMES configuration? Is it realistic to hope for this as an "enhancement" in a future release? Am I forever faced with the prospect of making/supporting the change myself over time? I am not averse to making or supporting the change necessary, but would prefer it if I did not have to deviate from the core JAMES server build. What are your thoughts? Thanks in advance, Joe Gulbronson (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) Senior Technical Analyst Principal Financial Group --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
