james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Noel J. Bergman" <n...@devtech.com>
Subject RE: Case sensitivity "Bug"?
Date Tue, 19 Nov 2002 00:20:54 GMT

Right now we are case sensitive ONLY.  If we are going to maintain case
sensitivity, I think that it has to be as an option.  Danny feels that the
option is important to preserve, and I don't have any reason to argue
against it.  But I don't think that we can be case sensitive ONLY, at least
based upon real-world problems I've seen on my own server.  And we already
do have the option; we just don't expose it to the Mailet API.

By the way, servers that mungle case in transmission are in CLEAR violation
of the RFC.  Only a local host may chose to be case insensitive in
interpreting its own local-parts.

	--- Noel

-----Original Message-----
From: Serge Knystautas [mailto:sergek@lokitech.com]
Sent: Monday, November 18, 2002 18:51
To: James Developers List
Subject: Re: Case sensitivity "Bug"?

Is this really worth supporting?  Given that other servers will mungle
the case, you can't use it reliably to indicate different behavior.  I
can see not mungling addresses as they go through James, but why would
an administrator WANT to enforce this harsh behavior on addresses it

Serge Knystautas
Loki Technologies

Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Danny,
> I believe that you are referring to RFC 2822, a companion to RFC 2821.
> Interestingly, there are comments in RFC 822 regarding case handling that
> are no longer in RFC 2822.  Instead, RFC 2822 now says that "how
> is used and how messages are transported to a particular host is covered
> the mail transport document [RFC2821].  These mechanisms are outside of
> scope of this document.  The local-part portion is a domain dependent
> string.  In addresses, it is simply interpreted on the particular host as
> name of a particular mailbox."  RFC 2821 then mandates than transport be
> case-insensitive, but encourages servers to not require case sensitivity.
> We can make this behavior optional by exposing the configuration to the
> Mailet API.  Do you have a preference by which we do so?  Should we add
> or more of the <usename> configuration attributes to the MailetContext
> attributes, e.g.,
> 	attributes.put(RFC2822Headers.LOCALPART_CASEINSENSITIVE, ignoreCase);
> which could then be picked up by any Matcher or Mailet?
> 	--- Noel
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Danny Angus [mailto:danny@apache.org]
> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2002 17:16
> To: James Developers List
> Subject: RE: Case sensitivity "Bug"?
>>What I meant is
> <snip!>
> I agree with your interpretation, however as the RFC which defines mail
> addresses (I forget which) says that local part IS case sensitive we
> take the route suggested by the stuff you quote, i.e. allow case
> insensitivity. My only point is that we should make this clear by making
> optional.
> d.

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

View raw message