>Executive summary: qmail breaks VERP under certain circumstances.
Revised executive summary: qmail's VERP works fine, but some people
are more than a little unclear on the way virtual domains work.
>Let H be a host running qmail, A and B users at H, and V a virtual domain
>redirected to B@H. Let X@V, i.e. B-X@H, be forwarded to some other, maybe
>remote, address, say K@L. Now, let's assume A uses
>
> QMAILINJECT=r qmail-inject X@V
>
>to send a "VERPed" message M to X@V. M is forwarded to K@L. Now, let's
>assume the delivery to K@L fails and the message is bounced back to A.
>Well, it should be bounced to A-X=V@M, shouldn't it?
Well, actually, it should be bounced to A-X=V@H, and that's exactly
where it goes since that's the address that VERP creates. (I presume
M was a typo for H there.)
> ...
>Unfortunately, the return address in the scenario described above is
>
> A-B-X=V@M
No, it's not. Qmail rewrites target virtual domain addresses at the
time they're delivered, and virtual domain handling doesn't rewrite
return addresses at all, ever.
>... A *completely untested* patch is here:
Too bad you didn't test it, you could have avoided wasting a lot of
time.
I misunderstood what you were arguing last time. The only time you
might have to consult control/virtualdomains to handle a VERP is if
the domain sending the VERP'ed mail is itself a virtual domain. I
happen to have a bunch of mailing lists in virtual domains, and they
have bounce handlers. I can assure you from experience that all
addresses on the mailing lists are handled the same, and it makes no
difference whatsoever if an address to which VERP mail is sent is
local, remote, virtual, or anything else.
--
John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl,
Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail
