Return-Path: <>

[Matt Kettler]

At 09:22 AM 12/23/2003, Paul van Brouwershaven wrote:
>All messages now returning to postmaster (@servername.com)
>
>But I want they go to noreply at servername.com so I can configure an alias
>to /dev/null for this address.

And that would be an extraordinarily BAD idea AND an RFC violation...
there's a reason for the empty return path. DSN's  MUST have such a return
path, and it's done for a VERY good reason (ie: preventing tripple,
quadruple and infinite bounces)...

 From RFC 1123 section 5.3.3:


         If there is a delivery failure after acceptance of a message,
          the receiver-SMTP MUST formulate and mail a notification
          message.  This notification MUST be sent using a null ("<>")
          reverse path in the envelope; see Section 3.6 of RFC-821.


If the double bounces bother you, perhaps you should more carefully
consider why you're using bounce in the first place.

If it doesn't dawn on you.. consider using procmail or something similar to
/dev/null any messages that postmaster gets that are double-bounces of
MailScanner messages...