Logs vs. headers

[Denis Beauchemin]

Peter Bonivart wrote:

> 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,

You won't see the new comments if you upgrade your config with 
upgrade_MailScanner_conf and you already use %org-name% = yoursite.

Denis
-- 

   _
  °v°   Denis Beauchemin, analyste
 /(_)\  Université de Sherbrooke, S.T.I.
  ^ ^   T: 819.821.8000x2252 F: 819.821.8045

-------------------------- 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