2012/6/26 Eric Charles <[email protected]>: > I was supposing that, but didn't take time to point the exact line in the > RFC.
This is all best summed up by section 5.2.9 of RFC1123, which says: ---- The syntax shown in RFC-821 for the MAIL FROM: command omits the case of an empty path: "MAIL FROM:<>" (see RFC-821 Page 15). An empty reverse path MUST be supported. ---- So, an empty email address is NOT a valid email address, but an empty email address is valid in an SMTP conversation as a way to say "no mail address". IIRC James 2.3 dealt with this using null sender in case a <> was received (so to not build an "invalid" empty address object). Stefano --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
