----- Original Message -----
From: "Claus Assmann" <ietf-smtp(_at_)esmtp(_dot_)org>
And this just my personal opinion, this level of MAIL FROM:sp syntax
check
that has absolute no SMTP level correlation to a malicious sender, yet
also
inconsistent with the majority of operations on the internet.
Well, that's your opinion. My opinion is that every relaxation leads
to overhead and more code (and in the worst case to security
problems). Where do you draw the line?
I feel ya. 100%. I agree with your thinking. I'm a stickler when it comes
to comformance. But I thin,. agan, just my opinion, I would make an
exception simply because its already burned in.
In fact, I think 2821bis should probably consider relaxing this with a
similar statement it has for the trailing space consideration:
Technically, the spec for the MAIL command is::
MAIL FROM:<reverse-path> [SP <mail-parameters> ] <CRLF>
No space before <CRLF> but section 4.1.1 says:
4.1.1 Command Semantics and Syntax
.....(In the interest of improved interoperability, SMTP
receivers are encouraged to tolerate trailing white space before the
terminating <CRLF>.)
I think this should also include the space before the reverse-path.
--
Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc.
http://www.santronics.com