On 4/7/06, David Nicol [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would write more but it appears that my building is on fire.
false alarm, apparently. Sorry
I think NO_ANGLEBRACKETS should be a flag set in the incoming message
object, so a simple REFUSE_NO_ANGLEBRACKETS plugin can look for
it and deny the message. That would be the qpsmtpd way, AIUI.
--
David L Nicol
Should the bike shed have bunks? Or maybe cots?
On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 14:07:35 -0800
Ask Bjørn Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to see a patch that makes a better API for reading the
command and the command parameters. The default can still be having
it space separated and provided in @_, but the hacks in mail() and
rcpt() to
On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 14:07:35 -0800
Ask Bjørn Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 16, 2006, at 10:38 PM, Hanno Hecker (via RT) wrote:
I'd like to see a patch that makes a better API for reading the
command and the command parameters. The default can still be having
it space separated
On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 23:24:38 -0800
Robert Spier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+ my ($rcpt) = ($rcpt_parameter =~ m/^to:\s*([^]*)/i)[0];
+ # support addresses without ... maybe we shouldn't?
+ ($rcpt) = . ($rcpt_parameter =~ m/^to:\s*(\S+)/i)[0] .
+ unless $rcpt;
It's perfectly
On Thu, 16 Mar 2006, Robert Spier wrote:
Suggestion is not to accept addresses without in mail() and rcpt().
We shouldn't do that unless some other major mailer is doing it.
Otherwise it will bite us.
Addresses without are not valid SMTP.
I think that mailfront requires . I've never
On Thu, 16 Mar 2006, Robert Spier wrote:
Suggestion is not to accept addresses without in mail() and rcpt().
We shouldn't do that unless some other major mailer is doing it.
Otherwise it will bite us.
Addresses without are not valid SMTP.
I think that mailfront requires . I've
Charlie Brady wrote:
Addresses without are not valid SMTP.
Yep - the angles are mandatory.
RFC2821:
4.1.2 Command Argument Syntax
The syntax of the argument fields of the above commands (using the
syntax specified in [8] where applicable) is given below. Some of
the productions
On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 09:09:11AM -0800, Robert Spier wrote:
Sure, but sendmail has accepted addresses without forever. I guess
the real question is what does qmail do? (Since that's out reference
implementation)
qmail-smtpd does not require 's in either the MAIL FROM or RCPT TO.
-mct
Robert Spier wrote:
[...]
Sure, but sendmail has accepted addresses without forever. I guess
the real question is what does qmail do? (Since that's out reference
implementation)
qmail-smtpd accepts without angles (see addrparse and the comment therein).
qmail-remote always sends with
On Fri, 17 Mar 2006, Charlie Brady wrote:
I think that mailfront requires .
It doesn't.
Robin Bowes wrote:
[...]
Sounds like this should be a configurable option, with default behaviour
to accept addresses without .
I don't object to it being configurable (other than the code involved),
but I think we should opt for RFC compliance as the default when the RFC
is unambiguous.
On Mar 16, 2006, at 10:38 PM, Hanno Hecker (via RT) wrote:
I'd like to see a patch that makes a better API for reading the
command and the command parameters. The default can still be having
it space separated and provided in @_, but the hacks in mail() and
rcpt() to read the rest aren't
Suggestion is not to accept addresses without in mail() and rcpt().
We shouldn't do that unless some other major mailer is doing it.
Otherwise it will bite us.
+ my ($rcpt) = ($rcpt_parameter =~ m/^to:\s*([^]*)/i)[0];
+ # support addresses without ... maybe we shouldn't?
+ ($rcpt) = .
14 matches
Mail list logo
