On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 09:55:21PM -0700, Tom Samplonius wrote:
>
> On Wed, 23 Aug 2000, Marc MERLIN wrote:
>
> > I know how to tell exim not to check the To: field. I may even be able to do
> > rewriting at the SMTP level to remove the dot, but the question is should I?
> >
> > RFC 822 isn't detailled enough to say (the BNF doesn't describe what atom is
> > supposed to be like)
>
> Since we are talking about SMTP, not headers, RFC-821 applies. RFC 821
> does not allow trailing dots.
Indeed, I should have taken a look at RFC-821 too. Someone pointed me to:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-drums-msg-fmt-08.txt
Section 4 says that an MTA must accept the forms that don't match the syntax
described in section 3. That said, it's perfectly fine for exim to allow
people to override this, be less lenient and punish non compliant senders.
However, shouldn't strip_trailing_dot be a default?
> However, you might want to look at the "strip_trailing_dot" option, as
> this handles most of the trailing dot garbage spit out by today's
> non-compliant software.
Awesome, just what I was looking for (the sad part is that I now remember
reading about that option when I read all the docs. I guess everything
didn't sink in my brain that well :-D)
Thanks,
Marc
--
Microsoft is to software what McDonalds is to gourmet cooking
Home page:
http://marc.merlins.org/ (friendly to non IE browsers)
Finger marc_f@??? for PGP key and other contact information
