Hi Stephen. Fyi your mailer messes like Mail-Followup-To: [email protected], ****************@sdaoden.eu
Stephen Isard wrote in <[email protected]>: |"Steffen Nurpmeso steffen-at-sdaoden.eu |s-nail|" <rphsq5v6dt@sneakemail\ |.com> wrote: |> i did not get near to the computer |> yesterday evening. | |Good for you! Rather i was super late and had to drive my bicycle workout much too fast in order to get around to the supermarket in time, made it within the last five minutes actually. (It is not as easy as it sounds as i before really *had* to visit two "animal friends" in two distinct forests in the near Odenwald, as their food supply (it would work without it, but ... you know) was due, and already the last night was not warm.) This was so distressing that i fell asleep after the hot thawing bath, and once i woke up i was already too late again for the remains of the daily work. Ha. Edinburgh is also not warm. But who would not forgive a beauty. |> So in short what you are asking for is a way to allow plain user |> names also in the SMTP code path. I see. | |Exactly. | |> What if i add "smtpname" for v14.10? I really want that to be |> explicit. Now one would have to think whether we should allow |> only matching (sub?) domains, then, as you say!?!, or whether MTA |> alias processing on the SMTP MTA side should still be assumed. |> I *think*, after only this five minute excurse, that this seems |> favourable if an explicit "smtpname" setting is introduced, real |> MTAs would do this, and i would constrain explicit user setting if |> i would not? What do you say? | |Sounds good. Will do. (All or nothing that is.) Ciao Stephen. --steffen | |Der Kragenbaer, The moon bear, |der holt sich munter he cheerfully and one by one |einen nach dem anderen runter wa.ks himself off |(By Robert Gernhardt) | |And in Fall, feel "The Dropbear Bard"s ball(s). | |The banded bear |without a care, |Banged on himself for e'er and e'er | |Farewell, dear collar bear
