On 2008/03/05 13:57, Antti Harri wrote: > > Hi Stuart. > > On Wed, 5 Mar 2008, Stuart Henderson wrote: > >> On 2008-03-05, Antti Harri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> On Tue, 4 Mar 2008, Theo de Raadt wrote: >>> >>>> If you are able to, please submit a dmesglog of the running machine to >>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- with the Subject: set to the type of your machine >>>> (ie. SunFire V215, or IBM eServer 325 or such) -- and PLEASE avoid the >>>> use of MIME, but instead send your messages without any special >>>> encoding since it lets our developers grep easily through the logs >>>> looking for specific machines when they are fixing bugs. Recently, I >>>> have had to start deleting the MIME submissions with the SPAM. >>> >>> Is this working for mail systems that are behind NAT/hidden otherwise? >>> Or would I have to "proxy" my dmesgs through a "real" server rather than >>> using the default sendmail setup on the test machines? >> >> It's always a good idea to make sure they're sent from an address which >> works, so people can get back to you if they have questions. > > One can always change the From and/or Reply-To headers to show the receiver > where to point replies. > > Isn't it also against the RFC just to silently drop messages and give > sender the accepted for delivery code?
Something can be accepted for delivery, and then fail later on. If the envelope address you sent a message from is invalid (which could well be the case if it's a hidden system), there's no way that the mail servers involved can let you know about this.
