>>Get the gateway fixed. Or then get  yourself a magic wand that glows when
>>rejection mail  is presented  to it.  I can't reject  this piece  of mail
>>based  on  the  'From:' field,  since  I  don't  see  any reason  to  bar
>>postmasters  from the  lists, and  I can't  reject it  based on  the mail
>>contents. And as I said, I will no longer make kludges to LSVXMAIL to try
>>to fix problems  that just can't be.  There is no end to  this game. Just
>>get the  gateway fixed to clearly  identify its mail as  a delivery error
>>notice.
>What is 'Undeliverable mail' as a subject?  chopped liver?
>How can I ask the gateway to change to a more clearly identifiable message?
>We are getting into an battle of "engineers", arguing the specs, while
>in the real world, people are drowning in a problem.
>>  Eric
>Harry
 
I wonder whether it is not time to propose a new standard header for
REJECTION-TO:  It would save a lot of grief if we just got some of the
critical gateways to honor it.  There was an extended discussion of adding
a ACK-TO: header on MAIL-L (& MAILBOOK) several months ago and that
investigation revealed that although RFC 822 says that SRI will accept
applications for new standard headers, it has never been done.  They are
quite willing to entertain such requests and will devise a procedure.
 
I would like to see both considered as a package - as more and more
gateways are created, I see both problems as causing more and more
problems.
 
-phil