Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!munnari.oz.au!mundamutti.cs.mu.OZ.AU!kre From: kre@cs.mu.OZ.AU (Robert Elz) Newsgroups: comp.mail.headers Subject: Re: Unreplyable addresses not considered illegal enough? Message-ID: Date: 10 Mar 91 23:43:05 GMT References: Sender: news@cs.mu.oz.au Lines: 22 bob@MorningStar.Com (Bob Sutterfield) writes: >I think that most mail users and administrators would agree that >unreplyable From: or Reply-To: lines are Wrong. Why is there no >stronger and more specific prohibition? My guess would be that quite often by the time mail reaches a point where the internet rules apply it can be impossible (or impractical, I guess its always to send mail back to the From: address, and await a reply indicating that the address works...) to determine whether an address is valid or not. Mandating the impossible doesn't seem useful. And even where a mailer can determine that the address is invalid, it can happen that the same address is in the envelope (in fact, happens all too offten). In these cases, the destination address is quite often reasonable, so its possible to deliver the mail, but not possible to rreturn it. Even if the recipient can't just "reply", he may know a working return address, it would seem better to deliver the mail than just drop it on the floor, mandating validation of the From: would make this illegal. kre