Users on two separate Exchange servers here have reported that they
don't see the reason part of messages rejected by sieve.
The Cyrus user has a reject rule. I can reproduce it simply as:
--------------------
##INGO
# sieve filter generated by Ingo (March 14, 2007, 8:51 am)
require "reject";
# Sieve Reject Test
if header :comparator "i;ascii-casemap" :contains "Subject" "please reject
this message" {
reject "You want it rejected, you get it rejected.";
stop;
}
---------------------
To see precisely what is returned, send mail to jb51@xxxxxxxxxxxx with
the subject "please reject this message". The mime message looks
syntactically correct to me, as follows:
main message is multipart/report
part 1 is text/plain
part 2 is message/disposition-notification
part 3 is message/rfc822
The Exchange messages were viewed with Outlook. Outlook users did not
see any of the message sent by Sieve, but only a new text generated by
Exchange or Outlook that looks like this:
---------------------
From: Mail Sieve Subsystem [mailto:mailer-daemon@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 5:20 PM
To: brennan@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Automatically rejected mail
Your message
To: jb51@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: test
Sent: 3/13/2007 5:19 PM
was deleted without being read on 3/13/2007 5:20 PM.
---------------------
One of our staff looked at one of the message also with Evolution, and
reported a *variant* form of the above message, making me wonder what
data Exchange is sending to the client. It looks like this:
---------------------
Your message
To: jb51@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: test attachment
Sent: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 17:18:41 -0400
was not readTue, 13 Mar 2007 17:20:06 -0400?
mail disposition
report attachment
Content-Type: message/disposition-notification
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Final-Recipient: RFC822; mailer-daemon@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Disposition: automatic-action/MDN-sent-automatically; deleted
Original-Message-ID:
<BEDDC45BE074D24C8F264EDB900E38F5015766EC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---------------------
Notice the changes in the line spacing, the Sent: line, the "was" line,
and the inclusion here of the text from mime part 2. Evolution also
indicated the presence of a dat attachment after this, which the Outlook
users did not see.
We did not yet test what Outlook shows when it reads as an imap client
off the Cyrus server. All the above was read off an Exchange server.
Possible fixes would be to format the rejection like a reply or a
forwarded message, or plain text, but it would be pretty dumb. Has
anyone else dealt with this at all? Any bright ideas?
Joseph Brennan
Lead Email Systems Engineer
Columbia University Information Technology
----
Cyrus Home Page: http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/
Cyrus Wiki/FAQ: http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/twiki
List Archives/Info: http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus/mailing-list.html
