> -----Original Message-----
> From: Danny Angus [mailto:danny@;apache.org] 
> Sent: 22 October 2002 12:15
> To: James Developers List
> Subject: RE: SMTP Handler
> 
> 
> Jason,
> 
> James does need well formed addresses, including incoming 
> ones, to route mail with, and the standards are quite clear 
> about what is and isnt acceptable. I expect we could accept a 
> wider variety than we do, but why would we? 

The only once we've ever come across is missing the <> around the email
addr.

> Mail is pretty much wholly dependant on people following the 
> rules, and IMO if we don't alert them to errors on their part 
> we're guilty of conspiring to water down the standards. I'd 
> be happy enough if the standards were changed, but really not 
> happy to see a de-facto standard arise which is an 
> un-documented and moving target.

I generally agree with you. It was just a comment from some of the Qmail
people.

> 
> James may well still be rejecting valid but unusual 
> addresses, we need'd really test cases for that though.
> 
> What kind of problems have you been seeing?

To be honest I've only normally seen this sort of behaviour for 2
reasons:
1) Badly written bulk mail tools 
2) Me trying to send SMTP by hand ;-)

> 
> d.
> 
<snip'd>


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:james-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:james-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org>

Reply via email to