* Victor Duchovni <postfix-users@postfix.org>: > On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 08:26:10PM +0100, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote: > > > I was looking for a (current) RFC section that says SMTP servers MUST accept > > messages sent by the null sender "<>", but almost all I found were > > references > > that say notifications MUST be sent as null sender. > > The empty sender is a valid sender. It must not be rejected as > syntactically invalid. > > It is unwise to reject mail from the empty sender, but nobody can force > you do accept it. You can reject any mail transaction you see fit to > reject for any reason. > > If you do reject all bounces, sites may choose to reject your mail, > because you are not interested in being informed of delivery problems > (and are unable to respond appropriately).
I agree completely with you. What I am looking for is a RFC that says the empty sender MUST be accepted. It seems so natural to me to do that and everybody says it's at least 'best practice' to do that that I was absolutely shure its am RFC MUST. Just like the requiremnt to accept "Postmaster" etc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- All technical answers asked privately will be automatically answered on the list and archived for public access unless privacy is explicitely required and justified. saslfinger (debugging SMTP AUTH): <http://postfix.state-of-mind.de/patrick.koetter/saslfinger/>
