On Wed, 25 Sep 1996, Chan Wilson wrote:
> > It would be nice if someone familiar with 1.94 could comment on how 1.94
> > deals with "John Smith"@foo.bar.com. The current version, 1.93, fails quietly
> Heck, isn't that an invalid address? "Undefined behaviour", I would
> say.. :)
If I'm reading RFC-822, http://ds.internic.net/rfc/rfc822.txt, correctly,
quoted-string are legal on the left side of an @. Anything is legal within a
quoted-string as long as ", \, CR and linear-white-space is correctly quoted.
This means that the address "/etc/passwd"@whitehouse.gov is a legal rfc822
As a matter of policy, my lists are more restrictive than rfc822.
> People sending administravia to the lists, that I can understand
> catching and parsing. But broken mailers? C'mon, we've got better
> things to do...
> (but yes, it should at least say "bogus address"...)
But who should it say it too? I don't think it should ever reply to an
> (oh, and if it's legal, well then, <sigh> )
(we don't want to allow everything that is legal. Multiline addresses are
legal if correctly quoted.)