RFC 2822 Compliance

[Philip Kaso]

When and will Outlook 2003 be RFC 2822 compliant? Specifically, with respect
to the resent-date, from, sender, to, cc, bcc, msg-id header fileds.

What I am trying to do is redirect multiple address to a single addrress,
and then subsequenly sort into queues based on the address redirected from
using header sort rules on the RFC 2822 'resent' fields.

 

[F.H. Muffman]

When and will Outlook 2003 be RFC 2822 compliant? Specifically, with

respect to the resent-date, from, sender, to, cc, bcc, msg-id header
fileds.

What I am trying to do is redirect multiple address to a single
addrress, and then subsequenly sort into queues based on the address
redirected from using header sort rules on the RFC 2822 'resent'
fields.

I'm pretty familiar with RFC2822, so, could you clarify exactly where the
compliance is lacking with regards to from, sender, to, cc, bcc, msg-id?

That said, Outlook 2007 and 2003 should both be able to run rules against
the header by using the 'with specific words in the header' condition. So
long as the resent-to header is coming in in the same format all the time,
it should be relatively easy to set up rules to look for it.

 

[Philip Kaso]

The problem I'm facing is when a redirect is applied to an address, say
(e-mail address removed) to have it redirect to (e-mail address removed) when it is received at
(e-mail address removed) there is no hook in the header that I can sort on that shows it
was redirected through (e-mail address removed) -- it just shows sender to (e-mail address removed).
What I have is several different product address that I want to redirect to
on address and then sub-sort them into queues in my CRM app based on what
product mailbox they came through. It is my understanding that, until the
RFC 2822 "RESENT_" functionality was encorporated I was stuck. My
understanding of the RFC 2822 "RESENT_" funct, is that in the scenario above,
when the e-mail arrives at (e-mail address removed) the header would include the hook i
need, i.e. RESENT_FROM (e-mail address removed)... so it would be FM: Sender > TO:
(e-mail address removed) [resent_from: (e-mail address removed)] [reply to: set to (e-mail address removed)].

 

[F.H. Muffman]

When and will Outlook 2003 be RFC 2822 compliant? Specifically, with

I'm pretty familiar with RFC2822, so, could you clarify exactly where
the compliance is lacking with regards to from, sender, to, cc, bcc,
msg-id?

That said, Outlook 2007 and 2003 should both be able to run rules
against the header by using the 'with specific words in the header'
condition. So long as the resent-to header is coming in in the same
format all the time, it should be relatively easy to set up rules to
look for it.

The problem I'm facing is when a redirect is applied to an address,
say (e-mail address removed) to have it redirect to (e-mail address removed) when it is received
at (e-mail address removed) there is no hook in the header that I can sort on that
shows it was redirected through (e-mail address removed) -- it just shows sender to
(e-mail address removed). What I have is several different product address that I
want to redirect to on address and then sub-sort them into queues in
my CRM app based on what product mailbox they came through. It is my
understanding that, until the RFC 2822 "RESENT_" functionality was
encorporated I was stuck. My understanding of the RFC 2822 "RESENT_"
funct, is that in the scenario above, when the e-mail arrives at
(e-mail address removed) the header would include the hook i need, i.e. RESENT_FROM
(e-mail address removed)... so it would be FM: Sender > TO: (e-mail address removed)
[resent_from: (e-mail address removed)] [reply to: set to (e-mail address removed)].

Ok, I'm a little confused.

If something isn't in the rfc2822 header it isn't Outlook's problem. Is
the data you need in the header if you look at the message on the server?

I would actually probably look for the email address that it was originally
sent to in the header. If it's not in the header tho, it isn't Outlook's
issue, it's the mailserver.