CiviCRM Community Forums (archive)

Let's assume that catchall is not an option for a domain (either because we prefer to bounce such mails or because we don't have access to this option on our mail server)
So the only option for return channel (please correct me) is to use the
civimail+s.1.2@example.com
approach.

Now, in our case this does not work either, as mail server does not support it, but that made me think... is it really necessary to pass the s.1.2 back in the To: field of an e-mail?
The processor is looking inside the messages anyway to categorize the bounces, so why couldn't it be checking for this code in the body?

That would make the return channel work with any sort of mailbox.

I see. I was thinking that there must be some reason :)

Re sender mail catching the bounces - that would fit the bill for me.

Why do you say not perfect? (any problems with servers respecting it?)

Let's assume that catchall is not an option for a domain (either because we prefer to bounce such mails or because we don't have access to this option on our mail server)
So the only option for return channel (please correct me) is to use the
civimail+s.1.2@example.com
approach.

Another option would be to have a regexp-based ‘catch-some’ account; in the past, this was the recommended approach – to configure your mailserver to forward emails addressed to [a-z].\d+.\d+…@example.com to a selected email account (and then process it).