--On 7 August 2006 14:32:46 +0200 Daniel Tiefnig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ian Eiloart wrote: >> --On 7 August 2006 09:33:29 +0100 Dave Evans >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> RFC1123: >>> 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. > > Thanks. Quite far-fetched, but at least it does say MUST. > >> And, while 821 omits it, 2821 doesn't: > > Yes, but RFC2821 didn't copy the "MUST support" thing. (What can we > learn from this?) Well, if you aren't going to support the syntax, then there's not much point playing the game. -- Ian Eiloart IT Services, University of Sussex -- ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/
