Op 6-4-2018 om 12:29 schreef Paul Hecker:
Hi,
Dovecot 2.3.1 (8e2f634). When using submission one client of mine can
not send messages. Directly sending through exim works. Seems that
dovecot is too picky or follow the RFC too precise here to be compatible.
Here is the debug log (note the space between “From:" and
"<us...@host.com <mailto:us...@host.com>>”):
Apr 6 12:02:08 mail dovecot: submission(u...@host.com
<mailto:u...@host.com>)<14972><ko4tJitpt9JYSSSC>: Debug: smtp-server:
conn 22.73.xx.144:53943 [0]: Received new command: MAIL From:
<u...@host.com <mailto:u...@host.com>>
Apr 6 12:02:08 mail dovecot: submission(u...@host.com
<mailto:u...@host.com>)<14972><ko4tJitpt9JYSSSC>: Debug: smtp-server:
conn 22.73.xx.144:53943 [0]: command MAIL; 501 reply: Submitted
Apr 6 12:02:08 mail dovecot: submission(u...@host.com
<mailto:u...@host.com>)<14972><ko4tJitpt9JYSSSC>: Debug: smtp-server:
conn 22.73.xx.144:53943 [0]: command MAIL: Ready to reply
Apr 6 12:02:08 mail dovecot: submission(u...@host.com
<mailto:u...@host.com>)<14972><ko4tJitpt9JYSSSC>: Debug: smtp-server:
conn 22.73.xx.144:53943 [0]: Trigger output
Apr 6 12:02:08 mail dovecot: submission(u...@host.com
<mailto:u...@host.com>)<14972><ko4tJitpt9JYSSSC>: Debug: smtp-server:
conn 22.73.xx.144:53943 [0]: Timeout stop
Apr 6 12:02:08 mail dovecot: submission(u...@host.com
<mailto:u...@host.com>)<14972><ko4tJitpt9JYSSSC>: Debug: smtp-server:
conn 22.73.xx.144:53943 [0]: Sending replies
Apr 6 12:02:08 mail dovecot: submission(u...@host.com
<mailto:u...@host.com>)<14972><ko4tJitpt9JYSSSC>: Debug: smtp-server:
conn 22.73.xx.144:53943 [0]: command MAIL; 501 reply: Sent: 501 5.5.4
Invalid FROM: Missing '<' at beginning of path
Apr 6 12:02:08 mail dovecot: submission(u...@host.com
<mailto:u...@host.com>)<14972><ko4tJitpt9JYSSSC>: Debug: smtp-server:
conn 22.73.xx.144:53943 [0]: command MAIL: Destroy
Apr 6 12:02:08 mail dovecot: submission(u...@host.com
<mailto:u...@host.com>)<14972><ko4tJitpt9JYSSSC>: Debug: smtp-server:
conn 22.73.xx.144:53943 [0]: command MAIL; 501 reply: Destroy
Is there a chance that you will incorporate a fix (be more compatible
but less stringent)?
I can make an option for doing that (some sort of workaround setting). I
am not a great fan of being liberal by default. That way, violations
like that will never surface. We will discuss this internally..
Regards,
Stephan.
