** Sometime around 20:11 12/9/96, Michael Rais said:
>Has anyone encountered the Subject header being
>myteriously dropped from large mailings,( appears on small
>ones ) and if so,
> is there a suggestion for correction?
I had a similar problem a while back. I had, at the time the problem
surfaced, recently started using a feature of ListProc that places a
customizable "Comment" on the TO line of outgoing list mail (along
with the list address). Suddenly, several list members complained that
they were getting blank SUBJECT lines. I axed <g> a couple of them to
send me their extended headers, and -- sure 'nuff -- blank subject
lines. In fact, *missing* SUBJECT lines!
Huh.
I removed the custom comment from the outgoing messages, and the SUBJECT
line problem went away. Poof!
I ran the problem by the CREN folks (thinking it might have been a
ListProc glitch -- it wasn't), and Tasos suggested that it might be the
recipient's MTA that was barfing on the header. Well, a few experiments
later, and (what a shock;-) he was right: Turned out that a sufficiently-
long TO line caused some MTAs to wrap the line -- and, in the process,
barf on the SUBJECT line. The end result was a missing SUBJECT, and a
partially-munged header. Once I shortened the comment by a few chrs,
all was back to normal (whatever that is).
Unfortunately, this problem goes back a tad, and I cannot recall the
magic length at which the TO line went south, or the MTAs involved. I
know you mentioned that this seems to be a function of the message size
(or were you referring to list size?), but there still might be a pony
in this pile somewhere.
Good luck ...
- Vince S.
wavelet@colossus.arl.mil
<http://www.humournet.com/HumourNet/>
--
For info on HumourNet--the Internet's moderated mailing list for humor--
send the command INFO HUMORNET (only one U) to listproc@csf.colorado.edu
--
Fight Spam on the Internet! <http://www.vix.com/spam/>
|
|
