On Fri, Sep 07, 2001 at 08:10:59PM +0200, Matthias Andree wrote:
[snip]
> I know that SMTP cannot transfer mail with incomplete last line,
> qmail-remote mentions that.
>
> But how come qmail-qmqpd accepts mail that cannot be delivered across
> all transport and that cannot be bounced?
The not being able to bounce it may be a bug, but most definitely not
in qmail-qmqpd.
> On a related issue, qmqp is not faster than smtp. SMTP must be
> implemented anyhow, two competing protocols just make the testing less
> thorough.
You are confused. QMQP and SMTP serve different purposes. Furthermore,
what makes you think QMQP is not faster than SMTP?
> "Keep it simple, stupid." qmail-send was a tad too stupid when creating
> the bounce. It must be able to ultimately send its bounce across SMTP,
> lest it be accused of trashing innocent mail.
Agreed.
> And that's what you get for ignoring RFC-1894 and 2045..2049 for your
> bounces, they also fail.
I fail to see how supporting such broken standards as DSN and MIME
would have solved this problem.
> The PROPER fix would be to reencode the mail (at least the bounce) to
> base64 or at least to send an RFC-1894 compliant bounce so the bounces
> survive.
Ouch. I actually helped a customer today by making sure a sendmail box
*wouldn't* encode valid 8bit data into base64. Mailservers shouldn't
encode, that's the MUA's job.
> There is no way QSMBF can handle truncated final lines across SMTP
> transports. RFC-1894 can handle that.
So fix QSMBF. Adopting a completely broken standard just because the
current standard has a flaw is overkill.
> Time for qmail-1.04, here's the suggested fix. It will change the bounce
> message, but we must do so to get the mail through SMTP.
A small price to pay, I'd say. Nothing dictates that bounce messages
should include the original message completely.
Interesting story.
Greetz, Peter
--
Monopoly http://www.dataloss.nl/monopoly.html
