OSEC

Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com
 
Subject: Re: null reverse-path
From: Rask Ingemann Lambertsen (rask-postfixkampsax.k-net.dk)
Date: Mon Jul 03 2000 - 18:03:03 CDT

Den 03-Jul-00 08:52:31 skrev adi fĝlgende om "Re: null reverse-path":

>So, please take a look at table 5.4: "SMTP REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY" of
>rfc1123. We could see the clear explanation of "must supported" on
>the same rfc. The rule is applied on while sending mail only.

   You really need to read table 5.4 (page 69) again. "Support empty
reverse path" is very clearly listed under "RECEIVER-SMTP" with an x in the
MUST coloumn. Section 1.3.2 has this to say:

        "MUST"

        This word or the adjective "REQUIRED" means that the item
        is an absolute requirement of the specification.

   Which particular part of the word "must" do you not understand?

>How about receiving mail with null reverse-path with _many_ envelope
>recipients? Do we _must_ receive that kind of mail?

   Yes, you must support at least 100 envelope recipients, IIRC. You can of
course reject such message if you have no mailboxes corresponding to the
recipient addresses, or if you do not relay for recipient domains, etc.
I.e. the usual, and only the usual, restrictions apply.

Regards,

/ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻTŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ\
| Rask Ingemann Lambertsen | E-mail: mailto:raskkampsax.k-net.dk |
| A4000, 896 kkeys/s (RC5-64) | "ThrustMe" on XPilot, ARCnet and IRC |
| Who is General Failure, and why is he reading my hard drive? |