On Mon, 19 Nov 2007, Valdis(_dot_)Kletnieks(_at_)vt(_dot_)edu wrote:
Seems people have problems wrapping their tiny little brains around the
idea that <> is useful for other things - in this particular case, it
was a mailing list manager that sent out all the "Please reply to this
message to confirm your request" messages with <> specifically because
it did *not* want to hear back if there was a problem (as the request
would just time out all by itself anyhow).
I don't think that is a valid use of a null return path. RFC 2821 section
4.5.5 says:
All other types of messages (i.e., any message which is not required
by a standards-track RFC to have a null reverse-path) SHOULD be sent
with with a valid, non-null reverse-path.
and the list of standards-track specifications is just DSNs (RFC 3461),
MDNs (RFC 3798), and vacation messages (RFC 3834).
Tony.
--
f.a.n.finch <dot(_at_)dotat(_dot_)at> http://dotat.at/
NORTH FITZROY SOLE LUNDY FASTNET: NORTHEAST BACKING NORTHWEST 4 OR 5,
OCCASIONALLY 6. SLIGHT OR MODERATE, OCCASIONALLY ROUGH. SHOWERS. GOOD.