> > What about if %u were permanently changed... but %n and %d left with > > the original values. It would seem that those people relying on the > > behavior of %u being stripped would not likely be using nor caring > > about the values of %n and %d since they are essentially discarding > > them anyway? That way you have %u acting as the "authentication > > username", and %n and %d containing the "username" and "domain" (as > sent by the client). > > Maybe, but it's still an incompatible change that could break existing > installations. Also you're thinking only about the case when you want > to drop the domain. auth_username_format can be used for a lot of other > things as well. It gets confusing if %n and %d sometimes change, but > sometimes don't.
True, I hadn't thought about that. I'm not much of a C programmer especially in the scheme of something as complex as Dovecot... but if you could be so kind as to point me within a couple of metres of the location in the code where the changes to %n and %d get made by auth_username_format, I'll try to patch something myself locally on my servers to get the result I need for now and leave it up to you to decide if it's worthwhile adding additional variables at some point down the road to expose the original values. Cheers, >>>>> Mike <<<<<