> > These are published for a reason. If they want to make them all the same > or > > different, fine. Just make them valid. > > > > --Eric > > I think it is absurd for the RFCs to suggest they have to be checked and > free of spam defenses, AND published. > Recipe for hell > > Allow TMDA on the must have addresses so that the sender has to confirm the > sender isnt vb-mailer spamware running a harvested db.
Actually, I do not think it is unreasonable to ask that a primary contact address be mostly free of obstructions. It is there for a reason. But note I say mostly. Hehe. I think people will be arguing that mostly as it presently stands in the RFCs for some time. --Eric
