Re: UPN + GROUP + UPNEXPAND question.

[Doug Royer <Doug.Royer@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

ned.freed@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> 
> > At 06:59 PM 3/9/2000 -0800, Doug Royer wrote:
> > >The reason that I think that, is that
> > >may MTA's do not allow VRFY or EXPN, they return unimplemented.
> > >I would suspect the same for UPNEXPAND. Many will NOT want
> > >to give out membership lists to spammers. And I do not see
> > >any benifit for UPNEXPAND - other than debugging. And
> > >it would not be used from a CUA, or at least it would not
> > >be reliable from a CUA as it can be turned off at the CS.
> 
> An MTA that returns unimplemented for VRFY is in technical violation of
> the SMTP specification.

Right - I meant to say - EXPN returns "no I will not", which
I think is not a violation.