Aredridel <aredridel(_at_)nbtsc(_dot_)org> said:
Directing bounces is the most difficult part of such an exchange, since
SMTP specifies that the MAIL FROM is also the place where bounces should
go to, leaving no application protocol level source of identity data.
The only solution is to have the originating system relay bounces to the
appropriate destination as a separate transaction, instead of
short-circuiting and going straight to the unverifiable sender address.
a recent discussion on ietf-smtp has been addressing the question:
"Do the must 'bounce' rules need to be relaxed for virus infected messages?"
Would a relaxation of the 'must bounce' rule also help here?
--
bz
please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an
infinite set.
bz+ietf(_at_)chem(_dot_)lsu(_dot_)edu