Am 25.03.2011 00:15, schrieb Murray S. Kucherawy:
MTA history goes back to sendmail, which had three main modes for injecting a
message:
1) sendmail user@host
[message header and body here]
["." or EOF]
2) sendmail -t
[message header and body here]
["." or EOF]
Both commands
> -Original Message-
> From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org
> [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Jeroen van Aart
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 2:21 PM
> To: Postfix users
> Subject: Re: bcc: header
>
> > The post service doesn't
> -Original Message-
> From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org
> [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Reindl Harald
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 1:00 PM
> To: postfix-users@postfix.org
> Subject: Re: bcc: header
>
> Am 23.03.2011 20:55, schrie
Jeroen van Aart:
> Michael J Wise wrote:
> >> I wasn't aware that I could use multiple RCPT TO:<> commands to
> >> accomplish Bcc. Hence me adding Bcc after the DATA.
> >
> > It's the other way around, actually.
> > Multiple RCPT TO:'s is how Bcc: is done.
>
> Right, good to know. :-)
>
> As a s
On Wed, 2011-03-23 at 18:44:15 -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> As a side note, what's the maximum amount of RCPT TO:'s postfix will
> accept in one session? Or is this just limited by the amount of
> available RAM and/or some kind of session timeout? Or maybe it's
> limited by how long the counter
Michael J Wise wrote:
I wasn't aware that I could use multiple RCPT TO:<> commands to
accomplish Bcc. Hence me adding Bcc after the DATA.
It's the other way around, actually.
Multiple RCPT TO:'s is how Bcc: is done.
Right, good to know. :-)
As a side note, what's the maximum amount of RCPT T
On 2011-03-23 Reindl Harald wrote:
> Am 23.03.2011 20:55, schrieb Jeroen van Aart:
>> I tried the following in telnet session, but for some reason the
>> email is only sent to the rcpt to: address. None of the Bcc'ed
>> addresses receive a copy. Am I missing something obvious?
Yes. Mail servers de
> I wasn't aware that I could use multiple RCPT TO:<> commands to
> accomplish Bcc. Hence me adding Bcc after the DATA.
It's the other way around, actually.
Multiple RCPT TO:'s is how Bcc: is done.
One has to have a clear understanding of the difference between RFC 822
(the message), and RFC 821
Matthias Andree wrote:
You may be aware of it, but I don't believe you've got the full picture yet.
Well I'm getting it now, thank you.
The post service doesn't care what Cc: you write on your letters either,
but only looks at the envelope.
Yes, I assumed an MTA may do some extra processing
Matthias Andree wrote:
I don't believe that it does that. It's likely some component further
down the delivery path - check the logs.
More a case of PEBCAK, I was looking at the wrong test email in this case.
Greetings,
Jeroen
--
http://goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/
http://linuxmafia
Am 23.03.2011 21:35, schrieb Jeroen van Aart:
> Matthias Andree wrote:
>> Yes - you seem to be misunderstanding how SMTP works. See RFC5321 [1]
>> for an explanation; for delivery, it matters ONLY what's in the
>
> I don't misunderstand in as much that I just barely ever had the need to
> use bcc.
Reindl Harald wrote:
BCC is a header so why you put it in the mail-body?
Because:
"Email header lines are not SMTP commands per se. They are sent in the
DATA stream for a message. Header lines appear on a line by themselves,
and are separated from the body of a message by a blank line."
h
Am 23.03.2011 21:38, schrieb Jeroen van Aart:
> How come that postfix treats multiple "rcpt to:" commands differently
> depending on the presence of a "bcc:" header in the data section?
I don't believe that it does that. It's likely some component further
down the delivery path - check the logs
Jeroen van Aart:
> Victor Duchovni wrote:
> > Bcc headers are part of the MUAs user interface, they have no meaning
> > in SMTP, Postfix silently deletes Bcc headers, they are not supposed to
> > be transmitted from the MUA to the MTA.
>
> How come that postfix treats multiple "rcpt to:" commands
Victor Duchovni wrote:
Bcc headers are part of the MUAs user interface, they have no meaning
in SMTP, Postfix silently deletes Bcc headers, they are not supposed to
be transmitted from the MUA to the MTA.
How come that postfix treats multiple "rcpt to:" commands differently
depending on the pr
Matthias Andree wrote:
Yes - you seem to be misunderstanding how SMTP works. See RFC5321 [1]
for an explanation; for delivery, it matters ONLY what's in the
I don't misunderstand in as much that I just barely ever had the need to
use bcc.
RCPT TO:
commands, not what's in the DATA section.
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 12:55:09PM -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> I tried the following in telnet session, but for some reason the email is
> only sent to the rcpt to: address. None of the Bcc'ed addresses receive a
> copy. Am I missing something obvious?
Bcc headers are part of the MUAs user
Am 23.03.2011 20:55, schrieb Jeroen van Aart:
> I tried the following in telnet session, but for some reason the email
> is only sent to the rcpt to: address. None of the Bcc'ed addresses
> receive a copy. Am I missing something obvious?
Yes - you seem to be misunderstanding how SMTP works. See RF
Am 23.03.2011 20:55, schrieb Jeroen van Aart:
> I tried the following in telnet session, but for some reason the email is
> only sent to the rcpt to: address. None
> of the Bcc'ed addresses receive a copy. Am I missing something obvious?
> rcpt to: n...@example.com
> 250 2.1.5 Ok
> data
> 354 End
19 matches
Mail list logo
