Philip S Tellis spewed into the ether: <snip>
Any idea why this is allowed (there is a special rule to allow it) at all?
A NULL sender <> is required for bounces/error messages. This is required by RFC 2821 (originally 821).
Sometime on Aug 30, dodobh@nettaxi.com assembled some asciibets to say:
error reporting is to specify a null reverse-path in the MAIL command of a notification message. When such a message is relayed it is permissible to leave the reverse-path null. A MAIL command with a null reverse-path appears as follows:
MAIL FROM:<>
But this still allows spammers to send anonymous mails. What's the RFC compliant solution?
Philip
On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, Philip S Tellis spewed into the ether:
But this still allows spammers to send anonymous mails. What's the RFC compliant solution?
No RFC compliant solution, AFAIK. Shoot a few spammers, maybe?
Devdas Bhagat
-
Devdas Bhagat -
dodobh＠nettaxi.com
-
Philip S Tellis