Call for INN 2.5.2 testing (new NNTP RFC 3977)
rra at stanford.edu
Sat Nov 28 09:31:37 UTC 2009
Julien ÉLIE <julien at trigofacile.com> writes:
> Hi Russ,
>> The syntax rule in RFC 5322 that rejects this is rather annoying. There's
>> nothing one can do about it at this juncture, but it's rather silly that
>> this is a syntax error on the LHS of either a message ID or an e-mail
>> address. It makes sense on the RHS, but periods really shouldn't have had
>> a special meaning on the LHS.
> It seems that it has always been the case. RFC 822 (and RFC 1036) already
> addr-spec = local-part "@" domain ; global address
> local-part = word *("." word) ; uninterpreted
> ; case-preserved
> word = atom / quoted-string
Yeah. It's been that way for years and years. It's just one of the rules
that, when someone complains about it, I have no really good response for
why that message ID isn't allowed other than "the standard says it isn't."
That's not true of most of the other stuff that we're seeing INN reject,
which has serious potential uniqueness problems.
Russ Allbery (rra at stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Please send questions to the list rather than mailing me directly.
<http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/faqs/questions.html> explains why.
More information about the inn-workers