Can the null address be specified in a ruleset?

[John Rudd]

On Apr 18, 2006, at 4:48 PM, Jim Holland wrote:

> On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, John Rudd wrote:
>
>> Be careful, you're required by RFC (I forget which one) to treat <> 
>> as a
>> valid address (it essentially means
>> "MAILER-DAEMON at the.originating.host", and the reason yours is being
>> inserted is probably that your MTA is qualifying and canocializing and
>> such).  I don't know if the RFC-Ignorant RBL has a case for people who
>> reject <> or not, but it wouldn't surprise me.
>
> We are only trying to block mail from the null address to this 
> particular
> user who is being bombarded by these junk notices.  I don't think 
> anyone
> would complain about taking action to protect yourself!  Of course we 
> are
> normally quite happy to accept mail from <> as it is the standard way 
> of
> avoiding bounce loops.

I mainly meant "don't reject/bounce, make sure you silently discard 
them".  You don't want any outside host to see you refusing them, if 
that makes sense.