I guess also, we can not influence our telecoms to change their configs for us, regardles of RFC recomandations, but that is not the issue, since there are many of them out there with the same issue: no empty from field will pass! I guess, noboy is using a relay because we are bored, but probably we do so because we have no choice. If I was sending mail directly, how would that help when that mail gets to any server which chooses to ignore messages with empty from field? I would still be loosing messages and not know why. If your SMTP relay service allowed empty sender, this wouldn't be an issueĪnd if HMS would not be sending e-mails with half baked from fields, this would not be an issue too. If you were sending mail directly from hmailserver this wouldn't be an issue PilaQ wrote:Still, this needs to be fixed. In my case, I have both sender and recipient set to be notified. If that's the case, then a rule IF FROM contains "mailer-daemon", THEN change FROM to and since local address will pass relay server policies, it will be delivered to whomever. I will post them as soon as I get a chance (likely not until tomorrow). On second thought, is it possible that the actual FROM is "mailer-daemon " (as in "Person Name " format)? Only showed up in my logs for the error messages that bounced. The issue is certain error messages (virus notification is the one I'm aware of for sure) are not sent from mailer-daemon. Recipient list NOT contains ' email to ' you do something similar to redirect to the ReplyTo or some other address I know RFC says differently, but where is the reason for empty from field? I believe this empty from field is a bug in HMS. I would prefer to be able to replace an empty from wield with a proper e-mail address beloning to my mail server. It is ony an assumption they do not exist except for this case. I will see this e-mail only when I open my e-mail client.Ĭ) it may still leave some yet unnoticed instances when an e-mail with the empty From field is sent out from HMS. But, OK, I can relay that information.ī) I can still not forward this e-mail to my original external e-mail address which I need so I get an instant notification of the e-mail. But still MUCH better than without itĪ) I am receivinng mailer-daemon notifications for all accounts instead of actual senders. So for me, this is acceptable as a partial solution. But, this means that one account (my) will get all mailer-daemon messages for all accounts (in my case, this is not a problem). Recipient list NOT contains ' email to ' sort of half works. Mattg wrote:I catch all mailer daemon messages and send them to a know account I know from the logs that error messages are getting bounced, so its something I need to put my attention to at some point anyway. I will try this when I have time later and post back if its successful. I haven't tried this yet, but you could probably set up a global rule to catch blank senders and force them to use a route, or at least change the sender so it can go out on your regular relay. They also have an option to allow blank sender, which I just turned on. This provider has no such policy as the first. ![]() (invalid sender)Ģ) I have a "backup" relay (smtp2go free account) that I use for certain routes. The provider has a policy of only sending mail FROM a (purchased) authorized domain. I sort of half resolved it.ġ) I have one relay service that I use as the main one. PilaQ wrote:b) make HMS relay using a legitimate e-mail address instead of an empty one, possibly a or the same one used in the to field ( Only peoplw with local accounts can send mails so we all have address connected to any other method that will get this messages to the sender is appreciated
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |