From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Sep 11 7:42:17 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from router.darlow.co.uk (pc2-bigg2-0-cust101.lut.cable.ntl.com [213.107.35.101]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5345137B405 for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 07:42:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from neil@localhost) by router.darlow.co.uk (8.11.3/8.11.3) id f8BEgD522261 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 15:42:13 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from neil@darlow.co.uk) Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 15:42:13 +0100 From: Neil Darlow To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why, this is new (and BAD, BAD, BAD!!) ... Message-ID: <20010911154213.A22243@router.darlow.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Hi Ceri, > My reply address is perfectly valid. Your Reply To: address isn't the issue. Unless the envelope is rewritten to remove the unresolvable hostname from the sender address information, remote mailers will complain. It is quite normal to strip-off the hostname for non-resolvable hosts e.g. I have a host ideal.darlow.co.uk on my private network which my local mailer config rewrites as sender@darlow.co.uk. Regards, Neil Darlow M.Sc. -- 1024D/531F9048 1999-09-11 Neil Darlow GPG Fingerprint = 359D B8FF 6273 6C32 BEAA 43F9 E579 E24A 531F 9048 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message