Zitat von Noel Jones <njo...@megan.vbhcs.org>:
On 8/4/2011 3:32 AM, lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote:Hellowe got problems with customers requesting MDN according to RFC-3798 with Disposition-Notification-To: header and using BATV on their gateways. On our side we honor read-request and sent MDNs with empty envelope sender to their Disposition-Notification-To: header which is unfortunately different form their BATV envelope sender and therefore dropped in many cases :-(As a workaround i had the idea to replace by Header check on our side the Disposition-Notification-To address by the return path but i'm not sure if this is doable or even a smart idea? Any comments?Not easy to do. You can't do that with header_checks or a postfix policy service, you would need a milter or proxy of some sort. At any rate, it wouldn't be a good idea to blindly rewrite all Disposition-Notification-To: headers to the envelope sender since they might be different intentionally. So I'm going with not a smart idea either.
So i will go the road to try to reach soemone at the remote end and otherwise ignore the problem. After all its their read-receipts which will get lost...
Ralf's suggestion of turning off DSN for selected offenders is probably the best.
But DSN != MDN, in our case the "offenders" don't use DSN anyway but many of them automatically request a read-receipt (Outlook/Exchange users).
Regards Andreas
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
