Re: virtualdomains vs. VERP and Delivered-To

[Alex Pennace]

On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 01:44:54PM +0000, Charles M. Hannum wrote:
> > Don't think of Delivered-To: as an address.  Think of it as a unique
> > magic cookie derived from email delivery path.  You can always
> > reconstruct the address if you know something about the delivery path,
> > and sometimes you may indeed have to.
> 
> I don't need to be taught the religion, thanks.  I'm already well
> aware of it.  And I don't buy it in this case.  What if
> `[EMAIL PROTECTED]' *was* a valid, different
> address?  It could falsely detect loops.  Maybe that wouldn't make
> sense in this particular case, but I'm sure you can construct a more
> palatable case with little effort.

No it wouldn't; if mycroft is the netbsd.org prepend, then
[EMAIL PROTECTED] would have a Delivered-To: line
of [EMAIL PROTECTED]

> Also, that doesn't resolve my VERP problem.

As I told you earlier this is a bug.