Re: [Exim] MAIL FROM:<>

On Sun, 26 Aug 2001, Lauri Tischler wrote:

> The 'dsn.rfc-ignorant.org listing policy' says :
> <quote>
> "The syntax shown in RFC-821 for the MAIL FROM: command omits the case
> of an empty path: "MAIL FROM: <>" (see RFC-821 Page 15). An empty reverse
> path MUST be supported."
> </quote>
>
> If I understand this right, the admin who is trying to protect his
> network fron unnamed spammers is made the villain.
>
> Why should anybody accept any mail without excisting from address.
> Immediately upon recieving a message, any sane MTA should check that the
> sender is valid, if not then dump the message.
>
Well, it depends on if you want to get bounces that inform you if
your mail couldn't be delivered for some reason.

If you don't care, then go ahead and break the RFC and reject the empty
enevelope sender.

/Andreas