On Monday, 25 January 2016 12:45:54 CET, Thomas Lübking wrote:
3(?) - is an empty message ID (looks like?) legal at all? (or is this maybe just broken with the in-reply-to mess?)
Nope, it could be absent, but not an empty string, but that's a minor cosmetic detail at this point :). You've got a good eye :).
Also, (risking to go off topic) rfc3501 seems to state that "sender" and "reply-to" cannot be NIL, but must equal "from" in doubt?
"We don't care", essentially, but yeah, it's a sign of the server being broken.
PS, "FUBAR", not "SNAFU" ;-)
Actually, even SNAFU applies here IMHO because it's apparently an in-house server reinventing the square wheel once again. For this sort of servers, it's SNAFU because their IMAP implementation tends to be FUBAR all the time.
Cheers, Jan -- Trojitá, a fast Qt IMAP e-mail client -- http://trojita.flaska.net/
