James G. Sack (jim) wrote:
John H. Robinson, IV wrote:
Gus Wirth wrote:
I recently discovered that Google mail accounts (gmail) allows a unique
form of e-mail address. It turns out you can use your e-mail name and
add a plus sign (+) and some other word to form a valid e-mail address.
For example, if I had an account at gmail with my user name of
not-my-real-address, I could do something like this:
That has been a part of sendmail for years.
Postfix supports +.
qmail (by default) uses -.
I had noticed that about qmail a long time ago, but it was a halfsies
kind of thing. I tested offsite to gmail, and gmail to gmail, and only
one worked. I submitted a feature request / trouble call about it, and
theyy fixed it: they removed the user+ext functionality altogether.
If it is back, I would not rely upon it always working.
What does work, and should always work, is that all .'s inside the user
portion are ignored. u..ser, us.er, and u.s.e.r. are all the same, but
you should be able to filter on them (untested).
So, do I understand correctly: that the formally valid rfc822 addresses
(such as examples above containing a '+' or '-' separator or any number
of embedded '.'s) are handled /by convention/ by mail transport and
delivery agents in their own _special way_?
According to RFC2396, '+' in the userid portion is legal.
When it was stated that "some websites don't accept these addresses" is
it a <form> that is failing the test or the actual transmission of the
email to the acct bouncing back to postmaster as undeliverable ?
--
Michael O'Keefe | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Live on and Ride an 06 BMW R12GS HP2 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] / |
I like less more or less less than |Work:+1 858 845 3514 / |
more. UNIX-live it,love it,fork() it |Fax :+1 858 845 2652 /_p_|
My views are MINE ALONE, blah, blah, |Home:+1 760 788 1296 \`O'|
blah, yackety yack - don't come back |Fax :+1 858 _/_\|_,
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
