Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site hou3c.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!hou3c!don.provan@CMU-CS-A.ARPA From: don.provan@CMU-CS-A.ARPA Newsgroups: net.mail.headers Subject: Re: smtp, errors and delivery Message-ID: <05Mar84.125014.DP0N@CMU-CS-A> Date: Mon, 5-Mar-84 12:50:00 EST Article-I.D.: hou3c.365 Posted: Mon Mar 5 12:50:00 1984 Date-Received: Tue, 6-Mar-84 04:32:29 EST References: <05Mar84.111651.EN0C@CMU-CS-A> Sender: ka@hou3c.UUCP (Kenneth Almquist) Lines: 18 To: Rudy.Nedved@CMU-CS-A Cc: Mark Crispin, Header-People@MIT-MC In-Reply-To: <05Mar84.111651.EN0C@CMU-CS-A> Rudy, Look at your example: your mailer is all set to reject the mail altogether because it doesn't like "bonzo_land". How can you be upset about the remote mailer sending you a blank field? Its first priority is to get the mail delivered. If you're going to reject the only from address it has, what else can it do? You aren't going to return an error message there anyway. I don't really understand why mail receivers are parsing this field so carefully, anyway. I've had several sites i couldn't get mail to because they tried to parse '"Provan Don%c"@LLL-MFE' and couldn't, so they rejected the mail. Its bad enbough that they can't parse it, but to reject some mail because a field that shouldn't ever get used can't be parsed is silly. I wasn't smart enough to think of sending an empty address if it wouldn't take my real address, but now that it's been suggested, I think I'll add it. Frankly, I think the only legal error to a mail command should be "too busy to send mail now." I don't think it makes sense to reject it because of a syntax error.