Re: [courier-users] Huge "To:" list results in empty message in (old) Courier

[Greg E. <ea...@is...>]

On Nov 18, 2009, at 3:14 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:

> From: Sam Varshavchik <mr...@co...>
> Date: November 18, 2009 3:14:23 PM PST
> To: cou...@li...
> Subject: Re: [courier-users] Huge "To:" list results in empty  
> message in (old) Courier
>
> Greg Earle writes:
>
>> I have a really old version of Courier (0.45.6) running in an  
>> environment that is locked down for a JPL flight project, so it  
>> cannot be replaced until/unless the whole machine is replaced.
>> On extremely rare occasions, I get e-mails that are empty, as  
>> received on my end via this Courier server.  As I receive it, it  
>> only has
>> Return-Path:
>> Delivered-To:
>> Received:
>> Received:
>> Received:
>> From:
>> and that's it.  No other headers, no message body.
>> I asked someone else who received the same message but on a  
>> different (non-Courier) server to forward me the raw message, and  
>> he got it in its entirety.
>> When I examined his copy, the "To:"/"Cc:" lines are both one line  
>> long, but with a huge amount of recipients.  Not many in the "Cc:"  
>> field - only 6 - but the "To:" field is huge - I'm guessing well  
>> over 100 people, maybe even 200.
>> It's telling that in the empty message I received, the "To:" header  
>> is missing as is "CC:" and everything that follows.
>> Clearly this is giving Courier heartburn - is there any knob to  
>> twiddle to let these messages through?
>
> There are no knobs to tweak. Courier itself does not care what's in  
> the headers of incoming mail. The only time Courier modifies or does  
> anything with headers is on messages originating locally, by  
> submitting them to the sendmail wrapper.  Its only treatment on all  
> other mail is to prepend its own Received: header.
>
> Perhaps you have some custom local mail delivery script that's  
> barfing.

Thanks Sam.  I have DEFAULTDELIVERY defined to be

DEFAULTDELIVERY="|| dotforward
| /opt/courier/bin/preline /opt/procmail/bin/procmail"

so I'm not sure which is obviously the culprit (presumably  
"procmail").  But at least it gives me a place to start looking.  (The  
"procmail" being used is similarly old - v3.22 - and is also similarly  
locked down, sigh.)

	- Greg