On 2008-04-25 09:43:33 +0100, Paul Smith wrote: > Peter J. Holzer wrote: > >On 2008-04-24 15:36:59 +0200, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote: > >>Robert A. Rosenberg writes: > >>>At 03:19 -0400 on 04/19/2008, Hector Santos wrote about Re: I-D > >>>Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt: > >>>> no-reply @ validdomin.com [...] > >>I would not bet that mail to such an address is stored on disk, or > >>causes any reaction other than (at most) an autoresponse. But YMMV. > > > >I wouldn't bet either, but I would consider it bad practice if the > >envelope sender for any automated mail is a black hole. If no human is > >reading it, then there should at least be some program which analyzes > >bounces and marks bouncing addresses as probably invalid. > > > The envelope sender for automated mail just be blank. That's defined as > the address you use if you don't want a bounce.
"automated mail" and "don't want a bounce" are pretty much orthogonal.
hp
--
_ | Peter J. Holzer | It took a genius to create [TeX],
|_|_) | Sysadmin WSR | and it takes a genius to maintain it.
| | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | That's not engineering, that's art.
__/ | http://www.hjp.at/ | -- David Kastrup in comp.text.tex
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
