Jeremy Harris <jgh@???> (Mi 13 Apr 2016 12:27:57 CEST):
> On 13/04/16 11:12, Heiko Schlittermann wrote:
…
> > I can imagine an option to force proper formatting of the message that
> > is included in the bounce. I'm not sure if this was discussed already.
> >
> > a) cut the overlong lines and add some note for the recipient
> > b) convert the to-be-bounced message body to some MIME format
>
> It's feasible... but you're _modifying_ the message that you're
> claiming to be including in this bounce. I suspect we'd want to
> be quite careful with the boilerplate wrapping the inclusion, to
> make this clear.
>
> And of course you're adding complexity and bugs.
>
> And if you remove the check at the smtp-transport stage, you
> need to think about how to deal with command-line sourced messages
> that will be sent outbound via smtp.
I'm not voting for transporting messages violating the RFC, thus I
wouldn't disable the check in the smtp transport stage. Exim should
refuse to accept such message per default (with the option to disable
the checks, as it is now). Doesn't matter if via cmdline or via SMTP.
If not rejecting such messages, than OTOH it's not Exim's job to
transcode anything, as we are not an Mail-Transcode-Agent ;)
But Exim should try hard not to generate such messages (as bounces),
e.g. by forcefully cutting the overlong lines, or by transcoding the
message into some other format.
Best regards from Dresden/Germany
Viele Grüße aus Dresden
Heiko Schlittermann
--
SCHLITTERMANN.de ---------------------------- internet & unix support -
Heiko Schlittermann, Dipl.-Ing. (TU) - {fon,fax}: +49.351.802998{1,3} -
gnupg encrypted messages are welcome --------------- key ID: F69376CE -
! key id 7CBF764A and 972EAC9F are revoked since 2015-01 ------------ -
