> On Apr 18, 2018, at 2:40 PM, Erwin <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> This may be old hat to some, but staring at the RFCs (specifically 2821) the
> only conclusion I see is that Microsoft is (or at least *.outlook.com servers
> are) violating the format of the Received headers here:
>
> Received: from mta.email.thinkgeek.com (66.231.88.32) by
> SN1NAM04FT019.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.88.152) with Microsoft SMTP
> Server (version=TLS1_0, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA_P384) id
> 15.20.675.14 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 16 Apr 2018 16:33:42 +0000
>
> Should that IPv4 literal be enclosed with "[" and "]" tokens, either as
> ([a.b.c.d]) or (hostname [a.b.c.d])?
According to the BNF yes, probably. In practice parsing Received headers is
more about heuristics than a formal grammar, especially with comments^Wanything
inside parentheses.
Time-stamp-line = "Received:" FWS Stamp <CRLF>
Stamp = From-domain By-domain Opt-info [CFWS] ";"
FWS date-time
From-domain = "FROM" FWS Extended-Domain
By-domain = CFWS "BY" FWS Extended-Domain
Extended-Domain = Domain /
( Domain FWS "(" TCP-info ")" ) /
( address-literal FWS "(" TCP-info ")" )
TCP-info = address-literal / ( Domain FWS address-literal )
address-literal = "[" ( IPv4-address-literal /
IPv6-address-literal /
General-address-literal ) "]"
Cheers,
Steve
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
[email protected]
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
