https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6535
--- Comment #7 from Kevin A. McGrail <[email protected]> 2011-01-19 15:12:39 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) > > This is not necessarily a good thing. > > An unparseable Received header field on an otherwise syntactically correct > header field is never a good thing, it indicates a bug in the parser > (which is already convoluted thoroughly and would need to be rewritten; > it should always be able to parse syntactically correct fields without > a need for hundreds of exception cases). > > Whether an unparseable header may happen to avoid some other problem > is unrelated. If it does, then there are two things to be fixed, > not just parsing. As anything but the last received header is subject to forgery, I'm not sure I see it as something that needs to be parsed. I'm not blaming Steve for the state of the parser and his patch looks good. I'm just wondering WHY we are parsing it because I don't want to see the IP being parsed from this header being used to check against RBLs. I know that will cause FPs. regards, KAM -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.
