Re: [PATCH][CVS IMAPd 2.1] lmtp_downcase_rcpt implementation (Re:Case Sensitivity)
--On Tuesday, December 24, 2002 12:01 AM -0200 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Here's the cleaned up patch, against 2.1 CVS. It could be enhanced not to touch the +fooobar part of the recipient, I suppose. Yes, and I wanted to add a comment on this... Put the work in now to make it not touch the +foobar part of the recipient, before it is given to the CMU folk for integration into CVS. We have all kinds of +plussed folders here at our site, and many of them contain mixed case characters (usually, the first character gets up-cased). So, I imagine that it would be a common issue elsewhere as well. Scott -- +---+ Scott W. Adkinshttp://www.cns.ohiou.edu/~sadkins/ UNIX Systems Engineer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ 7626282 Work (740)593-9478 Fax (740)593-1944 +---+ PGP Public Key available at http://www.cns.ohiou.edu/~sadkins/pgp/ msg10058/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [PATCH][CVS IMAPd 2.1] lmtp_downcase_rcpt implementation (Re:Case Sensitivity)
> On Wed, 25 Dec 2002 00:37:19 -0600 (CST), > Scott Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (ss) writes: ss> Damn, I fouind it earlier. Do a search for canonical, and/or lowercase ss> and/or regex. Really, it applies to any map lookup, which is why we haven't run into any problems... ss> It's actually funny: Back in ~2000 Weitse sent several E-mails stating ss> that Postfix lowercased everything because he felt it was simply ss> unacceptable to require end users to know what CaPiTaLiZaTiOn (he even ss> typed it that way!) a user name was, even though the RFC specified that ss> the MTA be case sensitive. ss> Cut to earlier this year, and he decides to stop lowercasing everything... Yeah, for one that professes displeasure at inconsistency, it seems ironic. When I saw the latest discussion I had a twitch in my gut, but life has been so hectic lately that I didn't dive in. Oh well -- Amos
Re: [PATCH][CVS IMAPd 2.1] lmtp_downcase_rcpt implementation (Re:Case Sensitivity)
Damn, I fouind it earlier. Do a search for canonical, and/or lowercase and/or regex. It's actually funny: Back in ~2000 Weitse sent several E-mails stating that Postfix lowercased everything because he felt it was simply unacceptable to require end users to know what CaPiTaLiZaTiOn (he even typed it that way!) a user name was, even though the RFC specified that the MTA be case sensitive. Cut to earlier this year, and he decides to stop lowercasing everything... hmmm... Scott -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ``Chews? I'll take charleston http://storm.lackluster.net/~scott/ chews for SIXTEEN MILLIONS!!'' On Wed, 25 Dec 2002, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > On Tue, 24 Dec 2002, Lawrence Greenfield wrote: > > --On Tuesday, December 24, 2002 11:57 PM -0200 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >On Tue, 24 Dec 2002, Lawrence Greenfield wrote: > > >>--On Tuesday, December 24, 2002 12:01 AM -0200 Henrique de Moraes > > >>Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>> Here's the cleaned up patch, against 2.1 CVS. It could be enhanced > > >>> not to touch the +fooobar part of the recipient, I suppose. > > >> > > >>I guess I'm mostly of the opinion that this is an MTA job, as most other > > >>recipient rewriting is, especially since Cyrus mailboxes are case > > >>sensitive. > > > > > >Well, at least part of the MTA crew disagreed, and that was why it was > > >removed from lmtp delivery in postfix. > > > > Well, I understand why they don't want to force all LMTP deliveries to be > > downcases. But Postfix must have some method of address rewriting. > > It does, but AFAIK, it is a royal pain to tell it to lowercase everything > using rewrites (rewrites in postfix are table based). Lots of overhead... > > I foresee trouble with postfix in that area, so I will be enhancing that > patch shortly. It is MTA-agnostic, and it might help people with other > MTAs in the future anyway. > > Mind you, I plan to request postfix lmtp to be configurable to lowercase > everything _as well_, but I must locate and read the thread that caused > people to switch that off in the first place... > > -- > "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring > them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond > where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot > Henrique Holschuh >
Re: [PATCH][CVS IMAPd 2.1] lmtp_downcase_rcpt implementation (Re:Case Sensitivity)
--On Tuesday, December 24, 2002 11:57 PM -0200 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Tue, 24 Dec 2002, Lawrence Greenfield wrote: --On Tuesday, December 24, 2002 12:01 AM -0200 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Here's the cleaned up patch, against 2.1 CVS. It could be enhanced > not to touch the +fooobar part of the recipient, I suppose. I guess I'm mostly of the opinion that this is an MTA job, as most other recipient rewriting is, especially since Cyrus mailboxes are case sensitive. Well, at least part of the MTA crew disagreed, and that was why it was removed from lmtp delivery in postfix. Well, I understand why they don't want to force all LMTP deliveries to be downcases. But Postfix must have some method of address rewriting. Larry
Re: [PATCH][CVS IMAPd 2.1] lmtp_downcase_rcpt implementation (Re:Case Sensitivity)
--On Tuesday, December 24, 2002 12:01 AM -0200 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Here's the cleaned up patch, against 2.1 CVS. It could be enhanced not to touch the +fooobar part of the recipient, I suppose. I guess I'm mostly of the opinion that this is an MTA job, as most other recipient rewriting is, especially since Cyrus mailboxes are case sensitive. I'm not strongly opposed. Larry
