Дилян Палаузов wrote:
Hi all,
Hi Дилян,
Section 2.1.2 of draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-06 speaks about how to
not-accpept a message (Action ereject, Rejecting a message at the
SMTP/LMTP protocol level).
It might happen, that the ereject's parameter is longer than 512
characters, or it can be multilined (e.g
ereject "First line
second line";
). The line terminators within the script are not necessary CR and LF,
it can be only CR or only LF. (at least cyrus' timsieved allows only LF).
RFC 5228 only allows for CRLF as end-of-line markers, so this document
shouldn't care about bare CRs or bare LFs used in scripts.
Do you think it is appropriate to specify in the draft, when it comes
to SMTP, one of:
- If the ejerect's parameter consists of several lines, that lines
are merged into one single line. This line is split in portions of
about 500 characters (the number comes from RFC 2821, Section 4.5.3.1,
"reply line"; subtracting from 512 the length of "250"/"550" code and
the lengtt of enhanced status codes), when possible no word is
hyphenated. Each portion of the so created string-list is returned on
a separate smtp line in a multi-line SMPT reply;
- (If the ereject's parameter consists of several lines, the line
separators are replaced with CRLF.?)
As per RFC 5228, this statement is not needed.
The SMTP makes multi-line reply, giving every line of the
reason-parameter on as a separate line in the SMTP dialog. (this
leaves unhandled the case, when a single line is longer than 512);
- If the ereject's parameter is longer than 500 characters, it is
truncated to 500 characters.
Personally, I don't like the 3rd choice. I would prefer to do a hybrid
of your proposal 1 and proposal 2: try to preserve existing CRLFs in the
text, but insert additional ones, if any single line is longer than 500
characters.
Of course with the usual sense of "Shall/Must/Might/" etc. My
question is more if the draft shall deal with very-long-multi-lined
ereject-parameters, than what to do exactly.