No worries, thats what the list is for :). Anyways, now that
there is hard evidence of the "_" being a valid character,
it might make some peopel think about there currrent
implentation :). But hey, if it works for your use, then why
fix it. :).
-Allan
On Mon, 26 Feb 2001 13:40:21 -0800, Michael Fair wrote:
>Having repeated the "_" being an invalid character from
>another sys admin that I trust, I decided to look it
>up for myself before responding.
>
>As it turns out, rfc822 ultimately identifies a
>"local-part" as a CHAR with some exceptions:
>local-part = word *("." word) ; uninterpreted
>word = atom / quoted-string
>atom = 1*<any CHAR except specials, SPACE and CTLs>
>CHAR = <any ASCII character> ; ( 0.-127. )
>
>"_" is 95 and is not part of the specials, SPACE, or CTLs
>groups. Therefore "_" is a valid character in the local-part
>of an email name.
>
>My mistake. My apologies for any inconvienence.
>
>-- Michael --
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Allan Rafuse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "Michael Fair" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Monday, February 26, 2001 12:58 PM
>Subject: Re: Cyrus v2.x
>
>
>> I thought the "_" character is valid in an email account. I
>> have friends that have "_" in there email accounts from
>> different providers. We also currently have a few accounts
>> with the "_". We are using plain text passwords for remote
>> clients that use various mail programs.
>>
>> Cyrus uses PAM to authenticate users through our Mysql DB.
>>
>> -Allan
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 20 Feb 2001 12:37:24 -0800, Michael Fair wrote:
>>
>> >I have no idea about the specific questions
>> >you are asking but I would recommend changing
>> >your naming scheme for a couple reasons.
>> >
>> >1) the "+" character is usually used to designate
>> >a sub mailbox. Sending mail to
>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] would be directly placed
>> >in the user.allan.cyrus folder. While it might
>> >be technically correct to use "+" further down
>> >the chain (like in a mailbox name), why take the
>> >risk of confusing yourself or the software like that?
>> >
>> >2) The use of "@" in the userid is also a bad idea.
>> >I'm thinking Kerberos 5 here, which cyrus also supports.
>> >If the KB5 code tries to interpret the userid as
>> >user@realm then it will strip the domain thinking it's
>> >the realm (and they also call it a domain).
>> >
>> >I don't know where in the code these symbols are
>> >relevant but rather than confuse myself, or take the
>> >chance that I get to be the lucky fellow to have to
>> >deal with the bug because I was doing something the
>> >authors weren't expecting, I'd use different symbols.
>> >
>> >Of all the choices I've seen "_" is the best in my
>> >opinion because "_" is not a valid character in emails
>> >or domain names so you have some safety in that nobody
>> >is going to try and split your userid up because of
>> >that character.
>> >
>> >Converting [EMAIL PROTECTED] to allan_freeview_com is
>> >the path most people take and it doesn't seem to cause
>> >any undo stress.
>> >
>> >That said, checking the RFC for LMTP to see if it says
>> >anything special about the "+" sign resturns a negative
>> >result. The RFC isn't very long and says nothing about
>> >any special characters in email names. Since I have no
>> >real knowledge about it (other than what the RFC says),
>> >you might be in technically correct territory and just
>> >dealing with an incorrect implementation (but I doubt it).
>> >
>> >The other possibility is that cyrus has taken complete
>> >responsibility for its plussed mailbox feature and
>> >carried it through to its LMTP implementation.
>> >
>> >I still would recommend changing your naming scheme, but
>> >maybe someone with more technical experience here can
>> >say something different.
>> >
>> >-- Michael --
>> >
>> >----- Original Message -----
>> >From: "Allan Rafuse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >Sent: Friday, February 16, 2001 12:59 PM
>> >Subject: Cyrus v2.x
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> A few questions here. We have been running 1.6.24 in a hacked for so
>that
>> >we can have virtual
>> >> users with username as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Our hacked form went
>through
>> >the input and
>> >> converted any '.'s in the username to '+'. So in imap from:
>> >> 1 LOGIN [EMAIL PROTECTED] pass
>> >>
>> >> would be translated to allan@freeview+com.
>> >>
>> >> The allan@freeview+com showed up in everything cyrus did. I also had a
>> >TCL front end
>> >> to the cyradm TCL program to do the conversion for me, so the only
>place
>> >you'd see a +com
>> >> would be in cyrus.
>> >>
>> >> Anyways :), I'm trying to upgrade to 2.0.11. I am able to login fine
>and
>> >list mailboxes, except I've
>> >> noticed a few new things with the LMTP. Here are the questions.
>> >>
>> >> 1. Why does LMTP tack on the '+' and then nuke from that to EOL in the
>> >verify_user function ?
>> >> What significance does the '+' have in the LMTP? If it's needed,
>> >> I'll need to use another character for the '+com' :)
>> >>
>> >> lmtpd.c verify_user() :
>> >> if (strlen(user) > sizeof(buf)-10) {
>> >> r = IMAP_MAILBOX_NONEXISTENT;
>> >> } else {
>> >> strcpy(buf, "user.");
>> >> strcat(buf, user);
>> >> plus = strchr(buf, '+');
>> >> if (plus) *plus = '\0';
>> >> r = mboxlist_lookup(buf, NULL, NULL, NULL);
>> >>
>> >> 2. Also, in the LMTP code, the domain is always stripped off the email
>> >address and it says "Getting Domain"
>> >> in comments around code. What does the domain portion have to do
>with
>> >LMTP.
>> >>
>> >> Hopefully I can still make Cyrus work how I want it too :). Any
>warnings?
>> >Most users use POP and we have
>> >> a couple IMAP accounts.
>> >>
>> >> TIA,
>> >> -Allan
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> <- Allan Rafuse ->
>> >> Systems Administrator
>> >> Freeview Publishing Inc.
>> >> email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> web: http://www.freeview.com
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>> <- Allan Rafuse ->
>> Systems Administrator
>> Freeview Publishing Inc.
>> email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> web: http://www.freeview.com
>>
>>
>>
>
>
<- Allan Rafuse ->
Systems Administrator
Freeview Publishing Inc.
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
web: http://www.freeview.com
