On 08/31/2011 01:33 PM, m.roth@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Josh Miller wrote:
>> On 08/31/2011 01:27 PM, m.roth@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>> Stephen Harris wrote:
>>>>> Here's a thought I just thunk, folks: some scum, apparently in eastern
>>>>> Europe, has harvested my email, and is using it in the Reply-To: in
>>>>> its spamming efforts. Now, I realize that some mails go out from
> <snip>
>>>> Anyway, the SMTP server should send the delivery failure to the
>>>> envelope address, which may be different to both the From and Reply-To
>>>> addresses.
>>>>
>>> That would be lovely. Unfortunately, a high percentage seem to use the
>>> Reply-To address. Trust me, the last four or five months, I've gotten
>>
>> The Reply-To address is an optional component of the email header and is
>> not used in email routing by mail servers.
>
> I'm well aware that it's an optional component.
Thank you for that clarification.
> <snip>
>> Mail server will send NDRs (non-delivery receipts) back to the envelope
>> sender every time with no regard for From or Reply-To.
>
> You're saying it uses the envelope, not if exists Reply-To, else From? The
> problem I have with that is that a few of them have returned the email,
> with full headers, and I see the *only* reference to my email address is
> in the Reply-To.
You are seeing the "full" email headers. You will not see the envelope
headers unless you capture packets or view mail server logs, etc..
--
Josh Miller
Open Source Solutions Architect
http://itsecureadmin.com/
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
