"To" should be considered a bogus header.

[jpmckinney]

No description provided.

[jpmckinney]

message-id is another candidate bogus header, but clearly we wouldn't want a "To" header to conflict with the "To" field in the JSON.

[temochka]

Hi,

Thanks! I think we’ll need to add unit tests for that. I’ll make sure to fit it into my next iteration. Also, we allow users to send their own message-id headers, so that header should not be considered bogus.

[jpmckinney]

Cool. I'm wondering why some of the others are bogus then - what's wrong with:

• date
• sender
• content-type
• return-path
• x-pm-rcpt

[temochka]

Good question. I’ll check on that with the API developers to make sure the list is still relevant. Will keep you posted.

[jpmckinney]

Well, trying to send date or content-type headers returns a 4XX error, with messages like Header 'Date' not allowed. This isn't documented anywhere in Postmark's docs, though.

The "bogus" headers return-path, sender and x-pm-rcpt don't raise any errors from the API if they are included in the request, so they should probably not be "bogus".

[temochka]

I confirmed with the API developers that using other bogus headers may cause certain features of Postmark not to work properly. So I only added To header to the list. Also wrote a simple unit test for this case. Thank you for reporting this!