On Mon, Apr 17, 2000 at 08:18:48PM -0400, Eric M. Johnston wrote:
> Peter van Dijk wrote:
> >
> > > After doing some experimentation, I discovered that the IMAP server is
> > > getting its time from the "From " header in the mbox, not the "Received:" or
> > > "Date:" headers, and passing this on to Outlook. When using POP, Outlook
> > > evidently gets the time itself from a "Received:" header.
> >
> > a From: header, I think. There is no common standard for Received-headers.
> > Also, in qmail, these will be UTC as well :)
>
> Umm, there isn't a timestamp in the "From:" header, just the mailbox
> "From " header (I assume that's what you meant). Anyway, Outlook seems
Sorry, I meant the Date: header. Clients don't normally (not with POP
anyway) see the "From " header anyway.
> to be able to cope with UTC in "Received:" headers, as in the POP case;
> just not in the "From " header that IMAP passes, because there's no
> indication that "From " is in UTC.
The Date: header is usually in a local time zone, and indeed clients are
encouraged to convert to local. Don't now if Outlook really does that
tho...
> > > This 'fixes' the time seen in Outlook, I guess because either IMAP or
> > > Outlook can now figure out the local time. My question is this: does this
> > > solution violate any standards or will it break anything obvious? Why
> > > doesn't qmail give some indication that the date/time given in this header
> > > is not local time?
> >
> > I can't find anything about this in RFC822, probably because RFC822 doesn't
> > describe mailbox formats, only message formats :)
>
> Yeah, this was my experience.
man mbox (from qmail) on the other hand, does specify an exact time format.
> > I don't know. I don't think it will break anything. I do think IMAPd is
> > broken for supplying the user with that info. But UW IMAP is broken anyway.
> > You do know that _another_ buffer overflow in UW IMAP was found somewhere
> > in the last few days?
>
> I agree completely. I'd much rather not use mailbox or UW IMAP, but
> circumstances require them at this point. Perhaps sometime in the
> future...
Hehe :)
Greetz, Peter.
--
Peter van Dijk - student/sysadmin/ircoper/madly in love/pretending coder
|
| 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot;
| C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off.'
| Bjarne Stroustrup, Inventor of C++
