On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 01:56:17 pm chris burgess wrote:
> I'm having a bit of trouble googling for this one because "<>" is not a
> meaningful term to them.
>
> Is it required that we handle emails with a sender of <> ?
See
http://rfc-ignorant.org/rfcs/rfc2821.php
> Are these legitimate bounces, or only spam attempts?
It would be hard to tell without something like BATV or content scanning.
>
> Our mailserver is getting sent spam which has an empty sender (contains
> only <>) , so I'm looking for an ACL check which will enable us to handle
> it correctly.
You might try implementing BATV or using a locally generated blacklist to
identify the offending hosts.
>
> But I don't want to do this if we SHOULD be accepting these emails.
