[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Sieve Clarifications

1997-05-27 12:32:54
On Wed, 30 Apr 1997, Chris Newman wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 1997, Tim Showalter wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 1997, Chris Newman wrote:

Section 2.5.2.

Also a useful section.  Need to add comments about how to RFC 822 quoting
of addresses is dealt with.  Remember that junk like:
   <"foo"  .  "bar"@baz.biff>
is a legal RFC 822 address, but for comparison one probably wants to treat
it as <foo(_dot_)bar(_at_)baz(_dot_)biff>

I'm not sure about this.  While a comparison in addresses should make them
the same, a comparision of From headers might treat them differently.  In
the document as it stands, there are no direct comparisons of addresses.  At
least, I didn't intend any.

Sorry, I was looking at notes on my document that I wrote as I
read it.  Comparison isn't so big a deal actually. More important is the 
addresses allowed in commands like "forward".  The problem is that 822
syntax is different from 821 syntax.  It also includes a lot of 
syntactical junk that's completely unnecessary.  If we want to make this
easy for implementors, I think we should require addresses in some
canonical form.

Choice 1:

Addresses must meet both 821 and 822 quoting rules.  Specifically, it's
either <local-part(_at_)domain> or <"local-part"@domain>.  Quotes around
name-components, whitespace and embedded comments should be disallowed.

Choice 2:

Address must be in unquoted form.  This means you have just
<local-part(_at_)domain>.  To convert to quoted form, one looks for the
rightmost "@" sign and has to quote the local-part if it contains any
specials other than "." (e.g. "@" is particularly nasty in local part).

Sorry for the very delayed response on this; I prefer choice 2 only because
it seems cleaner to me to users.  (Wording for the affected section would be


                                           Tim Showalter 

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>