I'm just curious as to why the RFC rules do not like not allowing a null sender as any email that is rejected usualy comes from a valid mail server and I have never seen one come in without an email address attached to it.
Actually, you have that backwards. The RFCs require that you accept E-mail from a NULL sender, because that is how bounce messages are sent.
When I turn on deny null sender about 20% of my spam go's away and my mail server works alot less hard.
And you lose some legitimate bounces/DSNs. But if you really do see 20% of your spam go away, something isn't right -- the last I checked, less than 1% of the spam sent to our spamtraps used a NULL sender.
-Scott
---
Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers since 2000.
Declude Virus: Catches known viruses and is the leader in mailserver vulnerability detection.
Find out what you've been missing: Ask for a free 30-day evaluation.
--- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)]
To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
