[Top] [All Lists]

Re: 3028bis open issue #2: unknown envelope-part names

2005-06-29 06:18:16

Alexandros Vellis wrote:

On Wed, 2005-06-29 at 01:06 -0700, Philip Guenther wrote:
The behavior of the 'envelope' test does not appear to be defined
for envelope-parts other than 'from' and 'to', ala:
        envelope "cc" "bob(_at_)example(_dot_)com"

Should that be a required error, required to be silently ignored,
or implementation defined?

(The only opinion other than my own that I've heard on this felt
that it should be a required error, so if no one speaks up, that's
the way it'll go.)

I would actually vote for 'implementation defined' (first choice) or
'silently ignored' (2nd). :-)

Why? I was thinking of the LMTP AUTH that can appear in an {S|L}MTP

MAIL FROM=<> AUTH=<user>

this could be mostly useful it it could be referenced to inside the
Sieve scripts.

Since it can be considered part of the envelope, one could use something
like :envelope "auth" "is" "avel" , and in the end use in the Sieve
script the information that a user was authenticated when sending a

So in the end, "auth" should be allowed to be there, apart from 'from'
and 'to'.
I agree. In fact this is what Cyrus Sieve does already.

OK, you could allow just that one through too, but what if more such
envelope "extensions" appear in the future? A bit difficult but
still. :)
I still think that an implementation should treat an unrecognized envelope part as an error. Scripts should not be using a feature without a proper require statement.