Re: MTS transparency and anonymity

> Sorry, I phrased that badly. I meant something more like:
>
> I wonder how many mail handling programs reject blah@[]. Does anyone 
> on the list know?
>
> (I wrote "spam filters" because that's where I instinctively expected 
> the most failures to be. A pretty bad reason.)
>
> Intuitively, I agree that a domain literal makes more sense... but in 
> the end I think my preference would be for whatever causes the least 
> breakage with current software.

mine also.  for me the choice is a narrow one between From: 
<something@[something]> and From: <>.   but the latter is invalid 
syntax.

my assumption is that it's better to pick something that is valid 
syntax for two reasons:

a) it's impossible to survey the implementations out there to find out 
what will break, but there's a good chance that something out there 
will check strictly enough to break on an invalid address.

b) given a choice between breaking a few things that conform to the 
spec (by being strict about syntax), and breaking a few things that 
don't conform to the spec (by failing to accept valid syntax), it makes 
more sense to break the latter set.