james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Danny Angus" <da...@apache.org>
Subject RE: SMTP Handler
Date Tue, 22 Oct 2002 11:15:13 GMT
Jason,

James does need well formed addresses, including incoming ones, to route mail with, and the
standards are quite clear about what is and isnt acceptable.
I expect we could accept a wider variety than we do, but why would we? 
Mail is pretty much wholly dependant on people following the rules, and IMO if we don't alert
them to errors on their part we're guilty of conspiring to water down the standards.
I'd be happy enough if the standards were changed, but really not happy to see a de-facto
standard arise which is an un-documented and moving target.

James may well still be rejecting valid but unusual addresses, we need'd really test cases
for that though.

What kind of problems have you been seeing?

d.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason Webb [mailto:jw@inovem.com]
> Sent: 22 October 2002 10:41
> To: James Developers List
> Subject: SMTP Handler
> 
> 
> I've noticed in the past (and at the moment) that James is very fussy
> about SMTP syntax for email addresses (MAIL TO etc). Although this is
> not a significant problem, Qmail has a much better outlook on life:
> 1) Accept anything (no <>)
> 2) Send only strict RFC addresses.
> And, yes I know about the standards, but some clients out there play
> fast and loose with them, so I'd like James to be a little more flexible
> on this front.
> 
> 
> -- Jason
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
> <mailto:james-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: 
> <mailto:james-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>
> 


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:james-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:james-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message