On Wed, 21 Nov 2007, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote:
Tony Finch writes:
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).
But 3461 (bottom two paragraphs of page 13) says any message can have <>
as sender when it reaches the recipient.
Null return paths have never been particularly consistent or clearly
scoped :-) But still, RFC 3461 doesn't say that arbitrary programs can
send email from <> because they think it would be neat.
f.a.n.finch <dot(_at_)dotat(_dot_)at> http://dotat.at/
MALIN HEBRIDES: NORTH VEERING NORTHEAST 5 TO 7, OCCASIONALLY GALE 8. MODERATE
OR ROUGH. SQUALLY SHOWERS. GOOD.