Dallman Ross wrote:
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 09:04:20 GMT
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 8:33:47 PDT
Are these RFC legit? I would think that an English abbreviation
instead of a numeric UTC (which, incidentally, is what GMT is now
known as) offset may not be but I am not sure. I suppose I could
just throw them in a big OR with the valid numeric offset but
I not sure I would trust email with a text only offset.
They are, unfortunately, legit. See RFC2822.
Well according to an April 2001 copy I just read they are obsolete.
Of course I just got my first false positive that had 'MDT' only :-).
Anyhow as I read it this should be the final solution (yeah right
:-):
:0 H
* !^Date.*+1300( |$)
* !^Date.*(([+-](1[12]|0?[0-9])[03]0)|([PMCEA][DS]|GM|U)T|UTC)( |$)
{
:0 H
* $ ${WEIGHT}^0
* 12^0
{ }
WEIGHT="$="
LOG="Weight adjusted for phoney timezone: $WEIGHT $NL"
}
Regarding your proposed "( |$)", a tab would also be perfectly
legit. One of my currently archived (last-100) good pieces
of mail has tabs in the Date: header, albeit not before the
TZ info.
The only thing I care about is the space or newline after the
timezone; but I suppose it could be a tab so change the end to:
"( | |$)". That's a tab in the middle.
--
Daryle A. Tilroe
_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail