Hi listadmin,

Following up on our private email correspondence on this issue.

Here are the headers from two mails: First from a mail from linux-india, and
second from a mail from linux-india-digest.

Mail from LID - forwarded to me by Baiju Mathew:

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Linux India Digest)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Linux India Digest V1 #564
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Mail from LI - got it as subscriber:

From: "Simanta Handique" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Old-To: "Linux-India Mail List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [LI] A "Some mails not reaching the respective users" problem
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Note how To: became Old-To: in the second mail? Can you set the same
thing for LID also? This will help people like Simanta and Baiju.

Basically, fetchmail in multidrop mode tries to determine the actual
recipient by looking at various headers - These include the Received:
lines (by default) and the X-Envelope-To: header. If none of these work,
then fetchmail falls back to To:/Cc: etc. This works in the case of LI,
as you can see from the headers above.

Fetchmail docs say that it parses the Received: lines in the mail by
default to determine the recipient. I am not sure how many of these
Received: lines it parses. Because, in the mail forwarded to me by Baiju,
there was an entry buried down in the Received: lines that said the mail
was received for [EMAIL PROTECTED] Probably fetchmail matches the server
domain first, and then the recipient name.

And Baiju, setting no envelope will not help you at all - it will just
disable fetchmail from looking at the Received: lines.

Binand

PS: It is just possible that the To: line was rewritten at my mailserver. I
haven't checked this yet.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
The Linux India Mailing List Archives are now available.  Please search
the archive at http://lists.linux-india.org/ before posting your question
to avoid repetition and save bandwidth.

Reply via email to