On 25 Mar 2004, at 02:26, bz wrote:
Aredridel <aredridel(_at_)nbtsc(_dot_)org> said:
Directing bounces is the most difficult part of such an exchange,
SMTP specifies that the MAIL FROM is also the place where bounces
go to, leaving no application protocol level source of identity data.
The only solution is to have the originating system relay bounces to
appropriate destination as a separate transaction, instead of
short-circuiting and going straight to the unverifiable sender
a recent discussion on ietf-smtp has been addressing the question:
"Do the must 'bounce' rules need to be relaxed for virus infected
Would a relaxation of the 'must bounce' rule also help here?
No. I think a lot of the time the "must bounce" rule is being invalidly
applied with virus notifications. The question comes down to: does
quarantining an email mean it has failed to be delivered? Most systems
quarantine rather than drop, yet they still send a notification.
A BCP would be a good idea though.
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email