On Thursday, February 26, 2009 at 19:57 CET,
Zoltan Balogh <zee.bal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2/26/09, Victor Duchovni <victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com> wrote:
>
> > Note, this notion of "correctness" is not one of those pedantic
> > types of "correctness" that is "optional". Systems that forward mail
> > to all header recipients are severely broken, and will cause mail
> > loops, blacklisting by annoyed incorrect recipients, abuse by
> > spammers, ...
> >
> > So in short, forwarding systems must PRESERVE the original message
> > envelope and must not re-create fresh envelopes from message To/Cc
> > headers.
>
> Preserving an original envelope is relevant only for SMTP
> communication.
Why would you say that?
> So the idea of fetching mail by POP3 and then forward
> it to mail recipients parsed from fetched email header is generally a
> bad idea?
Yes, of course. The To and Cc headers have nothing at all to do with the
intended recipient addresses.
> But if I am not wrong that's exactly what fetchmail and POP3
> mail proxies do - so all these systems are not correct and not
> recommended to use? I usually use transport mechanism of postfix
> to forward a SMTP communication to other mail server. Use of fetchmail
> is a server2-user requirement.
Multidrop POP is broken iff headers are used to determine the
recipients.
--
Magnus Bäck
mag...@dsek.lth.se
