> > This is valid: To: undisclosed recipients :; > > This is not: To: <undisclosed recipients> > > > > I would say that the former is not actually valid, though the syntax looks > correct. RFC2822 section 3.6.3 says that To:, Cc: and Bcc: must contain at > least one address. Not exactly. Bcc: can be empty (note that the syntax line in 3.6.3 is slightly different; it allows either address-list or CFWS). Also, To: and Cc: must contain an "address-list", but this requirement can be satisfied by an empty group construct, as in the first example above. (In a group construct, the "mailbox-list" is optional.) > None of the three is > required, so if there is to be no recipient address in the header, the > To: and > Cc: lines should be absent. (If I remember correctly, RFC822 did > require > either To: or Cc: to be present.) It requires either To:, Cc:, or Bcc: to be present. If there is no recipient in the header, the message can have either an empty Bcc: or a To: with an empty group construct. I don't think this changed with RFC2822, but I can't find anything in the document that indicates that a destination field is required. ---- Cyrus Home Page: http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/ Cyrus Wiki/FAQ: http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/twiki List Archives/Info: http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus/mailing-list.html
