> > My feeling is that James > > should be agnostic to originator addresses and propogate them as is. > > That would be propagating invalid content that cannot be used > to reply: > >.... > > The SMTP handler would, and should, reject those addresses > when passed via SMTP.
The way I see it is there are two distinct cases... 1) An MTA should reject locally originated messages that are invalid in anyway. As Danny says, no MTA should ever introduce invalid messages into the system. 2) An MTA should be configurable as to if it should reject remotely originated messages that are invalid but still deliverable. A relaying MTA may not wish to act as an Internet Message format cop. If a remote message can be delivered without modification, the MTA should be configurable to do so. > That would be propagating invalid content that cannot be used to reply Yes it would, but mail clients are free to choose to reject messages for any reason, including those with invalid formats, such as invalid originator addresses. Individual organisations choose to configure their MTAs to filter spam, viruses and inappropriate content. This is a similar case. They should be free to configure James to reject invalid, but deliverable messages. Maybe using the matcher/mailet approach suggested by Serge? -- Steve --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
