From owner-freebsd-isp Wed Jun 18 08:21:58 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id IAA22166 for isp-outgoing; Wed, 18 Jun 1997 08:21:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from noc.demon.net (server.noc.demon.net [193.195.224.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA22129 for ; Wed, 18 Jun 1997 08:21:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by noc.demon.net; id QAA01924; Wed, 18 Jun 1997 16:20:34 +0100 (BST) Received: from stress.noc.demon.net(195.11.55.5) by inside.noc.demon.net via smap (3.2) id xma001906; Wed, 18 Jun 97 16:20:28 +0100 Received: from hdm by stress.noc.demon.net with local (Exim 1.61 #3) id 0weMX4-0000o7-00; Wed, 18 Jun 1997 16:20:26 +0100 To: Jim Riffle cc: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Does anyone filter e-mail headers X-Mailer: nmh v0.14, exmh 2.0gamma, gvim 4.5 X-Colour: Green In-reply-to: Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 16:20:26 +0100 From: Dom Mitchell Message-Id: Sender: owner-isp@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Jim Riffle wrote: > > Does anyone out their use any kind of filtering mechanism for peoples > incoming mail to strip the routing information from incoming e-mail? The > other day I had a customer who though it was just terrible that we did > not filter off all that information for them. > > Personally, I think it is very useful and was wondering if anybody > actually does this kind of thing. Which kind of routing information is this? If he means the "Received:" lines, then strippping them out is a really, really, bad, non-standards conforming idea. If he means getting rid of route-addrs, then why are they there in the first place? -Dom