On Mon, May 05, 2008 at 11:56:51AM -0700, Mike Markley wrote:
> If this header is actually being eaten by the smfi_chgheader() then it
> is a bug in the Postfix Milter implementation.
Could be. I guess that one way to verify this theory is to write a very
basic milter which would just try to repro
On Mon, May 05, 2008 at 03:21:50PM +0100, Marcin Owsiany <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> My guess would be that the API does not work like spfmilter assumes it
> does. I don't know where the bug lies, though.
>
> Yes, I am using etch, postfix 2.3.8-2
My understanding from talking to other Postfix f
On Sat, May 03, 2008 at 07:39:17PM -0700, Mike Markley wrote:
> It seems more likely to me that the Received header is somehow being
> suppressed (it should be inserted by the host that's running spfmilter,
> right?)
No. It is removing the most recent Received header which is _already_ in
the rece
It seems more likely to me that the Received header is somehow being
suppressed (it should be inserted by the host that's running spfmilter,
right?)
I still don't understand how spfmilter could be causing this, so I plan
to take it to postfix-users or similar. Based on the spfmilter package
versio
Yes, I do get the "spoofed header" warnings with the problematic messages. And
no, I did not change the HEADER_NAME macro in source code :-)
Here are the config snippets:
main.cf:
---
smtpd_milters =
inet:127.0.0.1:12345,
# unix:/v
5 matches
Mail list logo
