Re: Remove Internal Hops from Header

On Tue, 01 Apr 2008 13:11:27 -0500, Grant Taylor wrote:

> I do not believe that removing Received: headers from outbound messages
> at the SMTP edge of a network breaks mail-loop detection/prevention like
> you are saying. However I am interested in having a discussion where
> one or the other or both of us proposes our scenarios where things will
> work and have the other poke holes in it if you are as well.

Please continue your discussion in comp.mail.misc. This newsgroup is
about sendmail, and your discussion isn't.

Re: Remove Internal Hops from Header

Greg Russell wrote:

> On Tue, 01 Apr 2008 13:11:27 -0500, Grant Taylor wrote:
>
>> I do not believe that removing Received: headers from outbound messages
>> at the SMTP edge of a network breaks mail-loop detection/prevention like
>> you are saying. However I am interested in having a discussion where
>> one or the other or both of us proposes our scenarios where things will
>> work and have the other poke holes in it if you are as well.
>
> Please continue your discussion in comp.mail.misc. This newsgroup is
> about sendmail, and your discussion isn't.

0) The comp.mail.sendmail *is not* "overloaded"
1) The discussion started with statements like "other MTA can do it,
sendmail requires external programs (milters) to do it".

I think the discussion stays reasonably on topic in news:comp.mail.sendmail

--
[pl>en: Andrew] Andrzej Adam Filip anfi@xl.wp.pl sip:896530@fwd.pulver.com
Open-Sendmail: http://open-sendmail.sourceforge.net/
When a lion meets another with a louder roar,
the first lion thinks the last a bore.
-- G. B. Shaw