spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Signed Envelope Sender: SRS on steroids

2004-02-28 11:17:26
On Sat, 2004-02-28 at 17:33 +0100, list+spf-discuss(_at_)doeblitz(_dot_)net 
wrote:
AFAICS many people seem to believe that <> is only meant for bounces while 
RFC2821 only states that bounces MUST be sent with that enevelope sender. 

RFC2821 §4.5.5.

   There are several types of notification messages which are required
   by existing and proposed standards to be sent with a null reverse
   path [...]                                     
                                            [...]  All of these kinds of
   messages are notifications about a previous message, and they are
   sent to the reverse-path of the previous mail message. [...]

   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.

-- 
dwmw2