Re: MTS transparency and anonymity
Tony Finch <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.rfc822 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Sun, 27 Feb 2005, Keith Moore wrote: > > if anonymous@[] doesn't quite work, there are similar alternatives worth > considering. among them are: anonymous@[0.0.0.0], anonymous@[127.0.0.1], > anonymous@[127.255.255.255], anonymous@[::0], and anonymous@[::1]. These might be OK in the message header. In the envelope they are likely to be rejected as invalid, because many sites put restrictions on the use of domain literals, and checks on envelope addresses tend to be more thorough. In addition to that, many sites reject domains that do not refer to globally routable addresses. Tony. -- f.a.n.finch <[email protected]> http://dotat.at/ LOUGH FOYLE TO CARLINGFORD LOUGH: SOUTHWEST VEERING NORTHWEST 4 OR 5 TODAY, THEN BACKING WEST 5 OR 6 IN EVENING BEFORE VEERING NORTH OR NORTHWEST 4 OR 5 TONIGHT. RAIN TODAY, WINTRY SHOWERS TONIGHT. MODERATE OR GOOD. SLIGHT BECOMING MODERATE LATER TODAY AND THEN MAINLY ROUGH TONIGHT.