CiviCRM Community Forums (archive)

Folks,

I notice that some bounce messages are ignored by the CiviMailProcessor. I think I've discovered why, and suggest a possible improvement.

Bounces from a Domino server are often ignored by CiviMailProcessor, and perhaps this could be improved by looking for the CiviMail address pattern in the "Delivered-To" header.

Let me flesh out the scenario. Assume I send a message To: bart@simpson.tv From: sender@my.org with Return-path civimail+b.1.2.e@my.org

Usually bounces are sent (in this case) To: civimail+b.1.2.e@my.org which CiviMailProcessor recognises as conforming to the CiviMail address pattern.

But Domino bounces are sent To: sender@my.org which CiviMailProcessor ignores (I can see that the code at CiviMailProcessor.php line 123 looks inside the mail body for addresses of the form 'civimail+b.1.2.e@my.org' but it doesn't find any)

I notice with these Domino bounces that the Delivered-To: header contains the CiviMail address, as does X-Original-To:

Ken

I’m not sure bouncing to anything else than the Return-Path: header contents is valid, really (that’s the whole point of that header/SMTP envelope sender).

How about looking for an address matching the CiviMail pattern in ANY header?

I thought about this, and it might be doable – provided we rule out all the other cases first (i.e., it will be the last resort before ignoring an email). Patches welcome, of course.

I wholeheartedly agree that the codebase should be kept free from idiosyncrasies (unless they're OUR idiosyncrasies, right?). And the world of mail systems is systematically idiosyncratic, from what I've observed!

In the spirit of "do no harm", and assuming that the presence of the CiviMail pattern (civimail+b.123.456.abcdef1234567890@my.org) anywhere in the email indicates it should be processed, is there any harm in looking in each of the headers?

If someone could show me how to iterate through the headers, I could attempt to submit a patch.

Ken