Mark Brennand wrote:
Stefano,
You can add JAMES 2.2.0 to the list of email servers that do not replace the
"wrong" header.
Yes, I know.
I said "it seems that Microsoft SMTPSCV is not rfc compliant *either*"
because of this.
I saw that James 2.2.0 (and james 2.3 branch until the fix) are not
compliant.
Stefano
--8<--
Return-Path: null
Received: from ten62.com ([65.99.215.49])
by mail.activeingredient.com.au (JAMES SMTP Server 2.2.0) with
SMTP ID 616
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Fri, 21 Jul 2006 08:31:47 +1000 (EST)
Received: from {omitted} ([{omitted}])
by mail.ten62.com (JAMES SMTP Server 2.3.0b3) with SMTP ID 55
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Fri, 21 Jul 2006 08:31:42 +1000 (EST)
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Mark Brennand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Null header test
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 08:31:35 +1000
Organization: TEN62
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0024_01C6ACA0.15C95A20"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869
Thread-Index: Acaq7saXXnBILSGVQW2A4C8jeUcoGQ==
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 00000000056A5680B4F8D84F9168EAB057FC5C0CC4EC4800
X-MessageIsInfected: false
X-UserIsAuth: true
X-ACTiVEAntiVirus: received and passed
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--8<--
Does the fix applied via http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-570
correct both scenarios i.e.
*) no longer adds this dummy on outbound and
*) corrects/replaces, if found, on inbound
Regards MB
-----Original Message-----
From: Stefano Bagnara [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, 19 July 2006 8:36 PM
To: James Users List
Subject: Re: Return-Path header value set to null using JAMES 2.3.0b3
As a sidenote, it seems that "Microsoft SMTPSCV" is not rfc compliant
either, because it have to override the Return-Path using the address used
in "MAIL FROM" in the protocol.
I was not able to reproduce this issue because most email servers (at least
sendmail and postfix) correctly replace the "wrong" header added by james
with the correct one (as the rfc specify).
Stefano
Mark Brennand wrote:
Here is a header to one of my external mail accounts (work) from one
of my JAMES accounts where the null value is showing up:
--8<--
Microsoft Mail Internet Headers Version 2.0
Received: from mail.ten62.com ([65.99.215.49]) by {omitted} with
Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211);
Tue, 18 Jul 2006 06:35:30 +1000
Return-Path: null
Received: from {omitted} ([{omitted}])
by mail.ten62.com (JAMES SMTP Server 2.3.0b3) with SMTP ID 996
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Tue, 18 Jul 2006 06:35:23 +1000 (EST)
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Mark Brennand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Mark Brennand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Meeting on Wednesday
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 06:35:18 +1000
Organization: TEN62
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0026_01C6AA34.581EC270"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869
Thread-Index: AcapVIGkr4v/thNuT56QqfM2BVg8rQ==
X-MessageIsInfected: false
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Jul 2006 20:35:30.0444 (UTC)
FILETIME=[8B7A14C0:01C6A9E0] {boundary stuff omitted}
--8<--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
