Re: [exim] suggestion for those implementing ACLs to suppres…

Jethro R Binks wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Aug 2006, John Horne wrote:
>
>> Yes. The RFC actual states that more than one recipient is possible (and
>> hence allowed). I can't remember which RFC it was, I would have to dig
>> it out again (possibly 2821), but I was reading about this very problem
>> a week or two ago.
>
> While that's true, is it a common occurrence? Does anyone have any feel
> for the risk of rejecting on this condition?
>

Just "defer" rather than "deny" when the RCPT count is greater than one
and the MAIL FROM is empty. A proper mail server will eventually work
its way through the list.

Of course if you are requiring that mail from an empty sender have the
return path be signed some way, new mails sent with an empty sender will
just get rejected further on when the signature is checked anyway.