--On Thursday, April 28, 2005 4:22 PM -0300 "Marc G. Fournier"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Someone mentioned that this was, in fact, not forbid'd in the RFCs ...
could you point to the relevant RFC where it is? Considering how
'strict' postfix seems to be, having an RFC to back that up might show
some changes over in that camp, at least ...
From my reading of RFC 2822 <http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2822.html> section
4, since the NUL character has been obsoleted, it can no longer be
generated, so the senders are out of compliance.
Section 4 does say:
Though some of these
syntactic forms MUST NOT be generated according to the grammar in
section 3, they MUST be accepted and parsed by a conformant receiver.
and
To repeat an example, though this document requires
lines in messages to be no longer than 998 characters, silently
discarding the 999th and subsequent characters in a line without
warning would still be bad behavior for an implementation. It is up
to the implementation to deal with messages robustly.
and specifically about the NUL:
Finally, certain characters that were formerly allowed in messages
appear in this section. The NUL character (ASCII value 0) was once
allowed, but is no longer for compatibility reasons. CR and LF were
allowed to appear in messages other than as CRLF; this use is also
shown here.
I highly suggest reading sections 3 and 4.
-David
--
David R Bosso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Systems & Network Manager, Letters and Science IT
UC Santa Barbara - 1054 North Hall 805 451-7160
---
Cyrus Home Page: http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus
Cyrus Wiki/FAQ: http://cyruswiki.andrew.cmu.edu
List Archives/Info: http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus/mailing-list.html
