Actually, i haven't. Section 5.2.9 states the following:
An empty reverse path MUST be supported.
I clearly stated that this was not in dispute.
Section 5.3.3 does indeed state that the null return-path _is_ required for
use, however references itself with section 3.6 of RFC 821, which
On Mon, 7 Feb 2000, ari wrote:
> Section 5.3.3 does indeed state that the null return-path _is_ required for
> use, however references itself with section 3.6 of RFC 821, which is the actual
> specification of the SMTP protocol. Section 3.6 of RFC 821, however, does
> _not_ state that the null r
