Re: [exim] IDN conversion

Kezdőlap
Üzenet törlése
Válasz az üzenetre
Szerző: Renaud Allard
Dátum:  
Címzett: Chris Lightfoot
CC: exim users
Tárgy: Re: [exim] IDN conversion


Chris Lightfoot wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 08:34:41PM +0100, Renaud Allard wrote:
>> I have just set the allow_utf8_domains to true. Now exim accepts my mail
>> to n@lórien.net. But it doesn't seem to understand the domain name.
>>
>> 2006-10-31 20:30:36 1GezJj-0007mM-CI ** n@lórien.net: mail domain
>> "l\303\263rien.net" is syntactically invalid
>
> see the spec -- you also need to change dns_check_names_pattern,
> or set it to the empty string.
>


This is even funnier. The message is accepted, and it tries to deliver
it to an unknown IP (verisign).

--------> n@lórien.net <--------
HMAC[md5](Fê¢*ËaÈ¡Pª,renaud=n=lórien.net)=8f0035cd37f6b84ec700fc5e4ab15588
search_tidyup called
set_process_info: 21199 delivering 1GezW7-0000r9-Oa: waiting for a
remote delivery subprocess to finish
changed uid/gid: remote delivery to n@lórien.net with
transport=remote_smtp_signed
uid=105 gid=105 pid=12245
selecting on subprocess pipes
auxiliary group list: <none>
set_process_info: 12245 delivering 1GezW7-0000r9-Oa using remote_smtp_signed
T: remote_smtp_signed for n@lórien.net
remote_smtp_signed transport entered
n@lórien.net
checking status of lórien.net
locking /var/spool/exim/db/retry.lockfile
locked /var/spool/exim/db/retry.lockfile
EXIM_DBOPEN(/var/spool/exim/db/retry)
returned from EXIM_DBOPEN
opened hints database /var/spool/exim/db/retry: flags=O_RDONLY
dbfn_read: key=T:lórien.net:198.41.1.35
dbfn_read: key=T:lórien.net:198.41.1.35:1GezW7-0000r9-Oa
no message retry record
lórien.net [198.41.1.35] status = usable
198.41.1.35 in serialize_hosts? no (option unset)
delivering 1GezW7-0000r9-Oa to lórien.net [198.41.1.35] (n@lórien.net)
set_process_info: 12245 delivering 1GezW7-0000r9-Oa to lórien.net
[198.41.1.35] (n@lórien.net)

Anyway, exim or thunderbird should try to convert it to
xn--lrien-0ta.net instead. For me it's he work of the MUA to do this.


>
> (None of this is doing anything to convince me that IDN is
> anything other than a trainwreck in the making, btw.)
>


I second that.