On 2007-07-14 23:50:25 -0700, SM wrote: > > At 17:09 14-07-2007, Peter J. Holzer wrote: > >Yes. When I did some experiments with SMTP callbacks some time ago, I > >found that most MTAs return that (I wonder what advertising the VRFY > >capability in the EHLO response and then returning a useless result is > >supposed to accomplish ...), but even worse, some expected the email > >address in angle brackets and some without, so you would get false > >negatives unless you tried both ... Too much trouble for too little > >gain. > > It might be better to list VRFY in the EHLO response only if the > command is supported by the installation. The "if EXPN is supported, > it MUST be listed as a service extension in an EHLO response." would > still apply. > > Draft-04 does not specify that angle brackets must be used.
Right.
> The example in that section could be clearer if it was:
>
> C: VRFY smith
> S: 553 User ambiguous
>
> or
>
> C: VRFY smith
> S: 553- Ambiguous; Possibilities are
> S: 553-Joe Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> S: 553-Harry Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> C: 553 Melvin Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> or
>
> C: VRFY smith
> S: 553-Ambiguous; Possibilities
> S: 553- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> S: 553- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> S: 553 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> or
>
> C: VRFY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> S: 250 smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> or
>
> C: VRFY [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> S: 250 smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The last two would be a separate example, I think.
> The before last example is for a user name and domain. Although it
> is accepted by some implementations, and I believe, readily used, it
> does not fit the description for a string as a user name.
It falls under 'hosts MAY also choose to recognize other strings as
"user names"'. The last form is IMHO the only form which must be
supported:
| An implementation of the VRFY or EXPN commands MUST include at least
| recognition of local mailboxes as "user names". However, since
| current Internet practice often results in a single host handling
| mail for multiple domains, hosts, especially hosts that provide this
| functionality, SHOULD accept the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" form as a "user
| name";
So "local maiboxes" MUST be supported ans "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" SHOULD be
supported. But how is a mailbox specified?
| The standard mailbox naming convention is defined to be
| "[EMAIL PROTECTED]":
Seems a bit redundant to prescribe the same form both via MUST and
SHOULD.
hp
--
_ | Peter J. Holzer | I know I'd be respectful of a pirate
|_|_) | Sysadmin WSR | with an emu on his shoulder.
| | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
__/ | http://www.hjp.at/ | -- Sam in "Freefall"
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
