Re: [PATCH][CVS IMAPd 2.1] lmtp_downcase_rcpt implementation (Re:Case Sensitivity)

2002-12-26 Thread Scott Adkins
--On Tuesday, December 24, 2002 12:01 AM -0200 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Here's the cleaned up patch, against 2.1 CVS.  It could be enhanced not to
touch the +fooobar part of the recipient, I suppose.


Yes, and I wanted to add a comment on this... Put the work in now to make
it not touch the +foobar part of the recipient, before it is given to the
CMU folk for integration into CVS.

We have all kinds of +plussed folders here at our site, and many of them
contain mixed case characters (usually, the first character gets up-cased).
So, I imagine that it would be a common issue elsewhere as well.

Scott
--
+---+
 Scott W. Adkinshttp://www.cns.ohiou.edu/~sadkins/
  UNIX Systems Engineer  mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   ICQ 7626282 Work (740)593-9478 Fax (740)593-1944
+---+
PGP Public Key available at http://www.cns.ohiou.edu/~sadkins/pgp/


msg10058/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: [PATCH][CVS IMAPd 2.1] lmtp_downcase_rcpt implementation (Re:Case Sensitivity)

2002-12-25 Thread Amos Gouaux
 On Wed, 25 Dec 2002 00:37:19 -0600 (CST),
 Scott Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] (ss) writes:

ss Damn, I fouind it earlier. Do a search for canonical, and/or lowercase
ss and/or regex.

Really, it applies to any map lookup, which is why we haven't run
into any problems...

ss It's actually funny: Back in ~2000 Weitse sent several E-mails stating
ss that Postfix lowercased everything because he felt it was simply
ss unacceptable to require end users to know what CaPiTaLiZaTiOn (he even
ss typed it that way!) a user name was, even though the RFC specified that
ss the MTA be case sensitive.

ss Cut to earlier this year, and he decides to stop lowercasing everything...

Yeah, for one that professes displeasure at inconsistency, it seems
ironic.  When I saw the latest discussion I had a twitch in my gut,
but life has been so hectic lately that I didn't dive in.

Oh well

-- 
Amos




Re: [PATCH][CVS IMAPd 2.1] lmtp_downcase_rcpt implementation (Re:Case Sensitivity)

2002-12-24 Thread Lawrence Greenfield
--On Tuesday, December 24, 2002 12:01 AM -0200 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Here's the cleaned up patch, against 2.1 CVS.  It could be enhanced not to
touch the +fooobar part of the recipient, I suppose.


I guess I'm mostly of the opinion that this is an MTA job, as most other 
recipient rewriting is, especially since Cyrus mailboxes are case sensitive.

I'm not strongly opposed.

Larry



Re: [PATCH][CVS IMAPd 2.1] lmtp_downcase_rcpt implementation (Re:Case Sensitivity)

2002-12-24 Thread Lawrence Greenfield
--On Tuesday, December 24, 2002 11:57 PM -0200 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

On Tue, 24 Dec 2002, Lawrence Greenfield wrote:

--On Tuesday, December 24, 2002 12:01 AM -0200 Henrique de Moraes
Holschuh  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Here's the cleaned up patch, against 2.1 CVS.  It could be enhanced
 not to touch the +fooobar part of the recipient, I suppose.

I guess I'm mostly of the opinion that this is an MTA job, as most other
recipient rewriting is, especially since Cyrus mailboxes are case
sensitive.


Well, at least part of the MTA crew disagreed, and that was why it was
removed from lmtp delivery in postfix.


Well, I understand why they don't want to force all LMTP deliveries to be 
downcases. But Postfix must have some method of address rewriting.

Larry



Re: [PATCH][CVS IMAPd 2.1] lmtp_downcase_rcpt implementation (Re:Case Sensitivity)

2002-12-24 Thread Scott Smith
Damn, I fouind it earlier. Do a search for canonical, and/or lowercase
and/or regex.

It's actually funny: Back in ~2000 Weitse sent several E-mails stating
that Postfix lowercased everything because he felt it was simply
unacceptable to require end users to know what CaPiTaLiZaTiOn (he even
typed it that way!) a user name was, even though the RFC specified that
the MTA be case sensitive.

Cut to earlier this year, and he decides to stop lowercasing everything...

hmmm...

Scott

--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ``Chews?  I'll take charleston
http://storm.lackluster.net/~scott/ chews for SIXTEEN MILLIONS!!''

On Wed, 25 Dec 2002, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:

 On Tue, 24 Dec 2002, Lawrence Greenfield wrote:
  --On Tuesday, December 24, 2002 11:57 PM -0200 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  On Tue, 24 Dec 2002, Lawrence Greenfield wrote:
  --On Tuesday, December 24, 2002 12:01 AM -0200 Henrique de Moraes
  Holschuh  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   Here's the cleaned up patch, against 2.1 CVS.  It could be enhanced
   not to touch the +fooobar part of the recipient, I suppose.
  
  I guess I'm mostly of the opinion that this is an MTA job, as most other
  recipient rewriting is, especially since Cyrus mailboxes are case
  sensitive.
  
  Well, at least part of the MTA crew disagreed, and that was why it was
  removed from lmtp delivery in postfix.
 
  Well, I understand why they don't want to force all LMTP deliveries to be
  downcases. But Postfix must have some method of address rewriting.

 It does, but AFAIK, it is a royal pain to tell it to lowercase everything
 using rewrites (rewrites in postfix are table based).  Lots of overhead...

 I foresee trouble with postfix in that area, so I will be enhancing that
 patch shortly.  It is MTA-agnostic, and it might help people with other
 MTAs in the future anyway.

 Mind you, I plan to request postfix lmtp to be configurable to lowercase
 everything _as well_, but I must locate and read the thread that caused
 people to switch that off in the first place...

 --
   One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
   them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
   where the shadows lie. -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
   Henrique Holschuh