rotten news relay - comp.mail.sendmail

Subject: Re: Reply-To
From: D. Stussy
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail, comp.mail.headers
Followup: comp.mail.headers
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 20:09 UTC
References: 1 2

Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.linkpendium.com!news.linkpendium.com!news.snarked.org!nv-184-1-9-234.dhcp.embarqhsd.net!not-for-mail
From: spam@spam.org (D. Stussy)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail,comp.mail.headers
Subject: Re: Reply-To
Followup-To: comp.mail.headers
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 13:09:46 -0700
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <nerhq9$2dc$1@snarked.org>
References: <a4aebeb3-6ab2-475c-9787-65590fdda9aa@googlegroups.com> <5710e272$0$44984$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>
Reply-To: "D. Stussy" <newsgroups+replies@kd6lvw.ampr.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 20:09:45 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: snarked.org; posting-host="nv-184-1-9-234.dhcp.embarqhsd.net:184.1.9.234";
logging-data="2476"; mail-complaints-to="newsmaster+complaints@snarked.org"
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
In-Reply-To: <5710e272$0$44984$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 15.4.3538.513
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V15.4.3538.513
X-No-Archive: Yes
Importance: Normal

View all headers

"ClausAßmann" wrote in message
news:5710e272$0$44984$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
Dave DeHanas wrote:
> Is a Reply-To header field required, and is "Reply-To: <>" valid?

1. This newsgroup is about the sendmail program, not generic e-mail
questions.
2. There are RFCs that specify the format of e-mail, e.g., RFC 2822 et.al.
Have you checked those?
....
===============
[Note the follow-up to group.]

In addition to that which is stated in the RFC, certain other "valid"
constructs will be treated as spam.

E.g. "Reply-To: <x@y.invalid>" - Use of the ".invalid" TLD in an optional
header is a clear sign of spam. That is not in any RFC (other than implied
in RFCs 2606 and 6761).

A "null" mailbox such as "<>" would also be considered spam. A null mailbox
is valid only in the SMTP MAIL FROM statement, not message headers.

Subject	Author
Re: Reply-To	D. Stussy

Today is the last day of your life so far.

comp / comp.mail.sendmail / Re: Reply-To