[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Nmh-workers] repl doesn't like return address

From: Ralph Corderoy
Subject: Re: [Nmh-workers] repl doesn't like return address
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2015 18:44:01 +0100

Hi Ken,

> So ... any MUA that generates an obs-phrase is NOT RFC-compliant, but
> any MUA that doesn't interpret it is ALSO not RFC-compliant.  So we
> can't really complain to others about RFC violations when we're not
> RFC compliant.

Course we can.  We don't have to tell them we're having trouble.
Perhaps there are spam rankers out there that penalise such blatant RFC
5322 violations and we're doing them a favour.

> I took a look at our email parser (it's in sbr/mf.c, and boy, does
> that filename seem appropriate now, because that's what I shouted when
> I was reading it).  I am unclear how it works at all for the trailing
> '.' case,


    366          case LX_DOT:    /* sigh (1) */
    367              pers = add (".", pers);
    368              goto more_phrase;

Cheers, Ralph.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]