DD> He also mentions software "causing problems in the network".

And what's your definition of that?

DD> Considering that one hell of a lot more systems run the mail processor I 
DD> run, that the one you run, and none of them are seeing any problems 
DD> suggests to me that YOUR software is too pedantic and too easily annoyed.

Sorry, gross faking to cover up your inability to conform to the
specs doesn't fool anyone.  Of course the system generating the
problem isn't going to see the problem.  It's the one CAUSING the
problem.  It's not a popularity contest, it's a matter of who is
conforming to spec, and who is violating the FTS specs.  Don't
bother trying to fake your way out.  Read the specs for yourself.
Hint - they don't say that the software you run is exempt from
having to follow the specs.

DD> I think that's mentioned in Policy too.

Yeah, where "annoying behaviour" is an continually-occurring
thing, not a once-off.  You were advised of the problem, so if
you do nothing to fix it, and continue to do it, you open yourself
up.  Don't bother faking as to why it's OK for you to not have to
follow the FTS specs.  Doesn't impress anyone.  BFN.  Paul.
@EOT:

---