On Sun, Nov 12, 2000 at 06:36:02PM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BTW, this isn't flamebait (comment for Felix). I'm just trying to
figure out why qmail is unable to correctly resolve an address in the
format
someone@domain
Have you ever tried to send mail to postmaster@com?
I have a vague
On Sun, Nov 12, 2000 at 06:32:17PM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Lovely attitude you got there, friend. Does your attitude pretty
much signify the attitude of the entire group here, or is it just you
with the superiority complex?
Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Go and learn how to properly
briank [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thanks for the response. I'm still a bit confused, though: If I
attempt to inject a piece of mail with a valid, RFC822-compliant
address, and qmail rejects it due to some sort of internal formatting it
does, does this not defeat the purpose of having
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Russ Allbery) writes:
Bruno Wolff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
He probably means a domain with no dots. For example: discuss@opennic
That's a dumb idea.
Anyway, qmail's behavior for such domain names is documented in
qmail-header(5):
All host names should be
Louis Theran [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you make defaultdomain the empty string, then you get:
box@host - box@host.
and if the host's name really is ``host.'', there's no problem.
Well, yes, there is, because box@host. is an invalid mailbox per RFC 822.
Trailing periods are not
On Mon, Nov 13, 2000 at 08:05:20AM -0800,
Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you mean "someone@domain" as the complete address with no dots on the
right-hand side? Bear in mind that RFC 822 contains *no* address
canonicalization provisions; if you're expecting your local domain to
Bruno Wolff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
He probably means a domain with no dots. For example: discuss@opennic
That's a dumb idea.
Anyway, qmail's behavior for such domain names is documented in
qmail-header(5):
All host names should be fully qualified. qmail-inject appends the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
BTW, this isn't flamebait (comment for Felix). I'm just trying to
figure out why qmail is unable to correctly resolve an address in the
format
someone@domain
What are you defining as correct, and why?
--
-russ nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://russnelson.com
Brian writes:
Maybe I can simplify the issue here by asking a question:
Is it the consensus here that the following is RFC822 compliant:
Why do you think RFC822 has anything to do with it?
defaultdomain: empty
QMAILDEFAULTDOMAIN=""
qmail-inject converts you@somew
Maybe I can simplify the issue here by asking a question:
Is it the consensus here that the following is RFC822 compliant:
defaultdomain: empty
QMAILDEFAULTDOMAIN=""
qmail-inject converts you@somewhere - you@somewhere. (note the period)
What kind of experts are you peop
at 1.03, given the support of folks like yourself.
On Sun, Nov 12, 2000 at 03:20:22PM +0100, Felix von Leitner wrote:
Maybe I can simplify the issue here by asking a question:
Is it the consensus here that the following is RFC822 compliant:
defaultdomain: empty
QMAILDEFAULTDOMAIN
Thus said [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sun, 12 Nov 2000 11:54:48 CST:
So you're basically saying that qmail can pretty much mung up an
e-mail address any way it likes because it's...qmail!
No, he is not saying that at all. qmail out-of-the-box will not munge
anything. What that user was asking
briank [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So you're basically saying that qmail can pretty much mung up an e-mail
address any way it likes because it's...qmail!
No, qmail-inject can munge up an e-mail address any way it likes because
the behavior of the program your MUA runs is not govered by any
Russ--
Thanks for the response. I'm still a bit confused, though: If I
attempt to inject a piece of mail with a valid, RFC822-compliant
address, and qmail rejects it due to some sort of internal formatting
it does, does this not defeat the purpose of having an Internet
standard to begin
On Wed, Nov 08, 2000 at 09:59:33PM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If this
is, in fact, a bug, I've got a patch which will prevent qmail-inject
from appending a "." when QMAILDEFAULTDOMAIN is set to "". But I wanted
to make sure this was truly a problem in need of a fix.
Why should anyone
Also, if QMAILDEFAULTDOMAIN isn't set, then this is the result (with an
empty defaultdomain):
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Also explained in the original post...
--Brian
Markus Stumpf wrote:
On Wed, Nov 08, 2000 at 09:59:33PM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If this
is, in fact, a bug, I've got
Maybe I can simplify the issue here by asking a question:
Is it the consensus here that the following is RFC822 compliant:
defaultdomain: empty
QMAILDEFAULTDOMAIN=""
qmail-inject converts you@somewhere - you@somewhere. (note the period)
--Brian
qmail-inject currently does not allow addresses of the following format:
hostmaster@opennic
If defaultdomain is left empty, then "defaultdomain" is appended to the
address. If QMAILDEFAULTDOMAIN is set to "", then a "." is appended to
the address:
hostmaster@opennic.
The RFC is pretty clear
On Mon, Jul 10, 2000 at 03:51:50PM +0200, Magnus Bodin wrote:
I use qmail-inject as my mutt mail queuing agent as this:
in my .muttrc:
set sendmail = '/var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject -f [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
I use this:
set sendmail='/usr/local/sbin/muttqmail'
where muttqmail is compiled from
This is because qmail-inject expects to be passed unencoded email addresses
and mutt passes rfc 821 encoded email addresses. They do this because
sendmail treats addresses as being rfc 822 encoded, and some unencoded
addresses won't work.
If you want these addresses to work you can modify the
On Mon, Jul 10, 2000 at 03:51:50PM +0200, Magnus Bodin wrote:
BUG-CASE:
echo "To: \"address with spaces\"@x42.com\nSubject: Hello 1" | \
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject -f [EMAIL PROTECTED] \
"\"address with spaces\"@x42.com"
Using echo -e "To:... this works for me.
FAILS!
but...
On Mon, Jul 10, 2000 at 09:18:09AM -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
This is because qmail-inject expects to be passed unencoded email addresses
and mutt passes rfc 821 encoded email addresses. They do this because
sendmail treats addresses as being rfc 822 encoded, and some unencoded
addresses
On Mon, Jul 10, 2000 at 04:22:11PM +0200,
Magnus Bodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How do you mean that mutt encodes the addresses?
It passes the address like this: "address with spaces"@x42.com
nothinge else.
Most likely you the address you are really referring to is:
address with [EMAIL
23 matches
Mail list logo
