Comments on: <cfmail> failto only accepts a single address? http://www.chapter31.com/2007/08/03/cfmail-failto-only-accepts-a-single-address/ Rich Internet Application development Fri, 13 Aug 2010 11:36:24 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: bg http://www.chapter31.com/2007/08/03/cfmail-failto-only-accepts-a-single-address/comment-page-1/#comment-50789 bg Fri, 16 May 2008 09:38:47 +0000 http://www.chapter31.com/2007/08/03/cfmail-failto-only-accepts-a-single-address/#comment-50789 One more thing to add. The failto has a limitation. If we have a pager id in "TO" of and a group id in "FAILTO", it will fail and will not send mail to pager. Also it will send a System Admin mail to "Group ID" mentioned that: Reporting-MTA: dns; Final-Recipient: pagerid@dd.com Action: failed Status: 5.7.1 X-Supplementary-Info: You do not have permission to send to this recipient. For assistance, contact your system administrator. One more thing to add. The failto has a limitation.

If we have a pager id in “TO” of and a group id in “FAILTO”, it will fail and will not send mail to pager. Also it will send a System Admin mail to “Group ID” mentioned that:

Reporting-MTA: dns;
Final-Recipient: pagerid@dd.com
Action: failed
Status: 5.7.1
X-Supplementary-Info:

You do not have permission to send to this recipient. For assistance, contact your system administrator.

]]> By: Michael Sharman http://www.chapter31.com/2007/08/03/cfmail-failto-only-accepts-a-single-address/comment-page-1/#comment-16282 Michael Sharman Fri, 03 Aug 2007 10:42:27 +0000 http://www.chapter31.com/2007/08/03/cfmail-failto-only-accepts-a-single-address/#comment-16282 Actually no...it doesn't make sense :( >whereas the “Return-Path” field is used to identify a path back to the origina- tor. Um...why would you need that? Actually no…it doesn’t make sense :(

>whereas the “Return-Path”
field is used to identify a path back to the origina-
tor.

Um…why would you need that?

]]> By: Michael Sharman http://www.chapter31.com/2007/08/03/cfmail-failto-only-accepts-a-single-address/comment-page-1/#comment-16268 Michael Sharman Fri, 03 Aug 2007 07:48:07 +0000 http://www.chapter31.com/2007/08/03/cfmail-failto-only-accepts-a-single-address/#comment-16268 Ah that clears things up, thanks Chris! Ah that clears things up, thanks Chris!

]]> By: Chris Dawes http://www.chapter31.com/2007/08/03/cfmail-failto-only-accepts-a-single-address/comment-page-1/#comment-16250 Chris Dawes Fri, 03 Aug 2007 04:56:50 +0000 http://www.chapter31.com/2007/08/03/cfmail-failto-only-accepts-a-single-address/#comment-16250 The failto: (known as return-path) only allows one address as the property is setting the address of the originator of the e-mail, not for reporting purposes. If you need multiple recipients, set up an e-mail group; even though this is not the correct use, it could be used for that. 4.3.1. RETURN-PATH This field is added by the final transport system that delivers the message to its recipient. The field is intended to contain definitive information about the address and route back to the message's originator. Note: The "Reply-To" field is added by the originator and serves to direct replies, whereas the "Return-Path" field is used to identify a path back to the origina- tor. While the syntax indicates that a route specification is optional, every attempt should be made to provide that infor- mation in this field. taken from: http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc822/ The failto: (known as return-path) only allows one address as the property is setting the address of the originator of the e-mail, not for reporting purposes. If you need multiple recipients, set up an e-mail group; even though this is not the correct use, it could be used for that.

4.3.1. RETURN-PATH

This field is added by the final transport system that
delivers the message to its recipient. The field is intended
to contain definitive information about the address and route
back to the message’s originator.

Note: The “Reply-To” field is added by the originator and
serves to direct replies, whereas the “Return-Path”
field is used to identify a path back to the origina-
tor.

While the syntax indicates that a route specification is
optional, every attempt should be made to provide that infor-
mation in this field.

taken from:
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc822/

]]>