Simeon Ott:
> and how did you guys configure gnarwl without having these problems?
> am i the only one who experienced this with GNARWL? that sounds a
> bit strange to me.
First, few sites use BATV.
Second, BATV works perfectly fine with autoresponders that adhere
to mail standards: a) reply to the envelope sender address, and b)
send the reply with a null envelope sender address.
I suspect that BATV also inter-operates with buggy autoresponders
that violate both requirements a) and b): reply to an address in
the from header, and send email with a non-null envelope sender.
But BATV won't inter-operate with buggy autoresponders that violate
only a) or b) but not both. That is a BATV feature, not a bug.
Currently, your gnarwl setup falls into none of these categories
since it changes a remote address into a local one.
You can prevent address destruction by not using the gnarwl -s
option (this means you will violate requirement a) above), but
that won't be sufficient for BATV inter-operability unless gnarwl
also violates the b) requirement.
Wietse
