I'm looking for guidance on the best practice when handling syntactically
invalid message id's in FETCH ENVELOPE responses. One of my users
has some messages that contain message-id fields like this:
> Message-ID: <5WIP7R4KN55D57C.84PY0HY1T52U."WinXPnews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
According to my reading of RFC2822 section 3.6.4, this is not
syntactically legal (please correct me if I'm wrong here - it's perfectly
possible that I might have misread the BNF).
If I report this message-id to the user's copy of Outlook Express as-is
(but properly quoted and escaped), it barfs and pretends that the
message doesn't exist: what's worse, when it does this, it seems to get
its internal message sequence out of step and can end up accessing the
wrong message on subsequent commands.
I'm *assuming* that the best practice in a situation like this is for me (the
server) to report NIL for the message-id field when the field is not
syntactically valid, but would appreciate feedback from on high.
Cheers!
-- David --
------------------ David Harris -+- Pegasus Mail ----------------------
Box 5451, Dunedin, New Zealand | e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: +64 3 453-6880 | Fax: +64 3 453-6612
Thought for the day:
At a party, Dorothy Parker noticed some people ducking for
apples and was overheard to say: 'Change one letter, and there
you have the story of my life'.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
For information about this mailing list, and its archives, see:
http://www.washington.edu/imap/imap-list.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------
