On 11/02/2004 at 07:39:26, imail wrote: > 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.
The null sender must be used as the sender for bounces etc, because otherwise there's a risk creating a mail loop between two servers. Note that the null <> is used in the envelope (the MAIL FROM command in the SMTP session), not necessarily the From: header, which is why you don't see it. The From: header in the email can be anything. > When I turn on deny null sender about 20% of my spam go's away and my mail > server works alot less hard. Nobody is suggesting you exempt mail from <> from your spam filtering, just that you don't block it outright. If my mail gateway server can't send one of your users a bounce, it complains to me. If a site doesn't fix that, they end up blocked - if they won't accept my bounces, I won't accept their mail and risk needing to bounce it. Cheers, Evan 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/
