From: Wietse Venema (wietseporcupine.org)
Date: Fri Apr 16 2004 - 08:27:51 CDT

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

martin f krafft:
> > Forwarding via .forward (and aliases) is recursive. What now?
> > Should the first expand from... be reported? The last? There can
> > be only one. Do we care about giving away system internal info to
> > random strangers?
>
> The address to which some users decides to forward isn't exactly
> system internal, right; /etc/aliases is, to a certain degree.

Likewise the pathname of :include: files.

Postfix includes information about the bouncing host in the "sorry"
text, as well in the message/delivery-status info and of course
in the headers of the returned email message.

Postfix includes the forwarding user (or alias) name in the
message/delivery-status info as Original-Recipient:, when
it differs from the final recipient.

Without a great deal of effort (i.e. new bugs) it would be
possible to include the forwarding user/alias in the text/plain
section of Postfix DSN.

> I didn't consider the recursive nature of alias expansion, but now
> that you mention it, it makes perfect sense.
>
> It's good that the original message down at the bottom contains the
> RFC822 headers with the original recipient, which is far more
> relevant than the envelope data. However, I wonder if it's possible
> to change the following:
>
> "I'm sorry to have to inform you that the message returned
> below could not be delivered to one or more destinations."
>
> s/below/at the bottom of this mail/
>
> I feel that this would make it easier for the home user.

"below" dates from before the time Postfix adopted the DSN format.
"at the bottom" is equally wrong, because the returned message
is in the form of an attachment. So it seems better to rephrase
this as "message returned as attachment".

        Wietse

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]