> At 03:02 AM 3/5/2009 -0800, Ned Freed wrote: > >> So yes, this may be an example of an SMTP relay violating RFC-5321. The > >> quote above was from a paragraph in 5321 talking about recipient addresses, > >> however. > > > >The quote in question is from section "2.3.11 Mailbox and address" and that's > >under the SMTP terminology heaing. It is in no way specific to recipient > >addresses.
> OK, if we interpret the MUST in section 2.3.11 to mean all email addresses, Given that it's in a general terminology section, I don't see how we have a choice. > then something should be fixed. The prohibition on SMTP relays changing or > re-interpreting local parts should apply only to recipient addresses. But that goes much too far. For example, I don't want externai systems forcing my addresses to lower case (or upper case) on a whim. I'm with Hector on this - you shouldn't be allowed to modify addresses you don't own, nno matter where they appear. > Changing a Mail From address should be allowed. Changing it from one address to another, yes, absolutely. But changing, say, [email protected] to [email protected] because you happen to like mixed case is not OK. Who knows, external.com might just be using case-sensitive local parts. (The more fool they if they are, not because software out there diddles witt case a lot - as a rule it doesn't - but rather because people are pretty sloppy about case when they enter addresses manually.) Now, an interesting corner case is something like SRS, where [email protected] becomes something like [email protected] But this actually isn't dependent on understanding local part semantics in any way - it only operates on overall address syntax. > I do that so as to redirect any bounces back to my domain where I can deal > with them summarily. I suspend the recipient's account immediately, and > wait until he tells me the problem is fixed. Any other policy could get me > on some blacklist. Yeah, we are all forced to dance these sorts of dances. Ned
