Logs vs. headers

[Peter Bonivart]

Kai Schaetzl wrote:
>>But it is nevertheless unusual, isn't it?  Might it be unusual enough to
>>warrant MS at least issuing a friendly warning-like (non-fatal) advisory
>>diagnostic of some sort?  That the email administrator might wish to
>>consider avoiding the "." in such MS-inserted headers?
>
> That's what it says in the comments of MailScanner.conf ...

I'm also surprised that this isn't enough:

# RULE: It must not contain any spaces!
# Note: Some Symantec scanners complain (incorrectly) about "."
# ***** characters appearing in the names of headers.
%org-name% = yoursite

How much needs to be checked by code because some can't (won't) read the
very good instructions in the config files?

--
/Peter Bonivart

--Unix lovers do it in the Sun

Sun Fire V210, Solaris 9, Sendmail 8.12.10, MailScanner 4.29.7,
SpamAssassin 2.63 + DCC 1.2.39, ClamAV 0.70 + GMP 4.1.2, Vispan 1.3

-------------------------- MailScanner list ----------------------
To leave, send    leave mailscanner    to jiscmail at jiscmail.ac.uk
For further info about MailScanner, please see the Most Asked
Questions at    http://www.mailscanner.biz/maq/     and the archives
at    http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/mailscanner.html