> So is it clear that the "use of return-path is required; mail
> systems MUST support it", and since IMail does not, it is RFC-wrong?
It's not RFC-wrong. RFC 2821 is not "mature" enough to be a standard.
Implementations that claim to be RFC-compliant need only comply with
821. Any perusal of RFC discussion will show hundreds of similar
conclusions: you can go with the still-changing new standards document
and continue to adjust your features as it adjusts its mandates if you
want to be cutting-edge, but you don't have to.
It would be nice to go with 2821, and increased chatter on the list
might lead to Return-Path: implementation, but IMail is not alone in
(correctly) claiming compliance even though the reverse-path is not
forwarded through as a header for POP3 clients.
--Sandy
------------------------------------
Sanford Whiteman, Chief Technologist
Broadleaf Systems, a division of
Cypress Integrated Systems, Inc.
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SpamAssassin plugs into Declude!
http://www.mailmage.com/download/software/freeutils/SPAMC32/Release/
To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
