hubcap@hubcap.UUCP (Mike Marshall) (01/01/89)
Does anyone do much with priorities in sendmail? I can vaguely imagine using them locally for some purpose, but unless one does have such a scheme set up, is there any reason to have them in one's cf file? I'm trying to strip out some spooge in mine that only seems to be there for historical reasons. I don't see any mention of "Priority:" headers in 822... -Mike Marshall hubcap@hubcap.clemson.edu
wisner@killer.DALLAS.TX.US (Bill Wisner) (01/01/89)
A few mailing lists I've been on have had filters that automatically added "Precedence: bulk" to every message. This is Very Useful. If a system has a large, clogged mail queue, it might be Very Useful to be able to push a message to an administrator to the top of the list. Precedence: (not Priority:) headers are a good thing and should be kept around. In fact, they should be used more. All the canned Sendmail configurations have a dinky little list of only three or four priorities. Smail 3.1 comes with five. I wouldn't mind seeing more Sendmail people adding all of these to their configurations. Smail 3.1 associates each grade with a single character, similar to UUCP grades, but they should by easily translatable into Sendmail numbers. 9 special-delivery A air-mail C first-class a bulk n junk
ccdan@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu (Dan Dorough) (01/01/89)
In article <3999@hubcap.UUCP> hubcap@hubcap.UUCP (Mike Marshall) writes: > Does anyone do much with priorities in sendmail? I can vaguely imagine using > them locally for some purpose, but unless one does have such a scheme set up, > is there any reason to have them in one's cf file? for priorities less than zero, sendmail will not bother to return bounced messages on failure. i have a few "junk" mailing lists here with lots (>50) of recipients, and i use "Priority: junk" to short-circuit a lot of failed mail trash. (if junk mail dies, it dies.) fairly useful, in a limited way. --dan dorough, ucdavis systems programmer, ccdan@ucdavis.edu