1996-02-20 - Returned mail: User unknown

Header Data

From: Mailer-Daemon@wipinfo.soft.net (Mail Delivery Subsystem)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 0dbbea176b56205073b5d61ae404c4d8ba26064dc644bc33304cf9a1599d9e41
Message ID: <9602201012.AB09634@s.wipinfo.soft.net>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-02-20 10:30:38 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 18:30:38 +0800

Raw message

From: Mailer-Daemon@wipinfo.soft.net (Mail Delivery Subsystem)
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 18:30:38 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Returned mail: User unknown
Message-ID: <9602201012.AB09634@s.wipinfo.soft.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


   ----- Transcript of session follows -----
550 rajr... User unknown

   ----- Unsent message follows -----
Return-Path: <cypherpunks@toad.com>
Received: by s.wipinfo.soft.net (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA09632; Tue, 20 Feb 96 15:42:56 IST
Received: from toad.com by relay3.UU.NET with SMTP 
	id QQadsh11578; Tue, 20 Feb 1996 04:51:09 -0500 (EST)
Received: by toad.com id AA25879; Tue, 20 Feb 96 01:43:53 PST
Received: from cs.umass.edu (freya.cs.umass.edu) by toad.com id AA25873; Tue, 20 Feb 96 01:43:48 PST
Received: from thor.cs.umass.edu by cs.umass.edu (5.65/Ultrix3.0-C)
	id AA22591; Tue, 20 Feb 1996 04:43:46 -0500
Received: (from lmccarth@localhost) by thor.cs.umass.edu (8.6.12/8.6.9) id EAA06099 for cypherpunks@toad.com; Tue, 20 Feb 1996 04:43:46 -0500
From: lmccarth@cs.umass.edu
Message-Id: <199602200943.EAA06099@thor.cs.umass.edu>
Subject: Re: Remailers not heard from; info?
To: cypherpunks@toad.com (Cypherpunks Mailing List)
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 04:43:45 -0500 (EST)
Reply-To: cypherpunks@toad.com (Cypherpunks Mailing List)
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960219191757.006d763c@mail.aracnet.com> from "Bruce Baugh" at Feb 19, 96 11:17:57 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Length: 814
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com
Precedence: bulk

Bruce Baugh writes:
> And as long as I'm asking questions :-), I see that some remailers
> (hfinney@shell.portal.com, hal@alumni.caltech.edu, homer@rahul.net) preserve
> subject lines while others do not. Is this a readily settable option? If so,
> I'd like to commend it to other remailer operators. If not, I'd be
> interested in getting some sense of how difficult a hack it is.

(Raph has authoritatively covered the space of deployed options already.)

Writing code to keep or drop particular headers is trivial. Getting everyone
who runs a remailer to deploy that code tends to be much harder.

-Lewis	"You're always disappointed, nothing seems to keep you high -- drive 
	your bargains, push your papers, win your medals, fuck your strangers;
	don't it leave you on the empty side ?"  (Joni Mitchell, 1972)





Thread